PDA

View Full Version : Why is 56-draw Birmingham an International and 32-draw Eastbourne a Premier?


Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:49 PM
I think Birmingham is the only International tournament with a huge draw (56 instead of 32). Why don't they switch the draw for Birmingham and Eastbourne or maybe switch the tournaments' status? It just doesn't make sense to me. :unsure:

Nicolás89
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:49 PM
$$$$$

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:51 PM
$$$$$

Then why don't they just reduce Birmingham's draw to 32 and increase Eastbourne's to 56?

Jose.
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:54 PM
Birmingham is the only grass tournament this week. And one of the few, if not the only, international tournament that is the only event played in X week. And Eastbourne has another tournament in same week and plus is the week before Wimbledon ;)

Slutiana
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:54 PM
Tradition.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:55 PM
6 matches in 6 days right before Grand Slam? Hardly a great idea.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 05:57 PM
Birmingham is the only grass tournament this week. And one of the few, if not the only, international tournament that is the only event played in X week. And Eastbourne has another tournament in same week and plus is the week before Wimbledon ;)

Monterrey is the only event played the week before Indian Wells and it only has 32 draw. They should switch Birmingham's and Eastbourne's week then. So Birmingham is played at the same week as 's-Hertogenbosch and switch the draw for Eastbourne (56) and Birmingham (32).

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:04 PM
Eastbourne is a combined event now. Now way it will be moved on the same week as Queen's Club.

AdeyC
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:06 PM
Tradition.

It's not tradition - at Eastbourne I remember it being a 64 player draw in the late 70's/early 80's and you'd have five matches on all courts on the first Monday (inc the likes of Navratilova, Evert, etc playing on the first day) - many days play would be going on till after 8pm.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:06 PM
They should've reduced Birmingham's draw to just 32 then :lol: It just doesn't make sense for Birmingham (international) to have a bigger draw than Eastbourne (Premier).

Meelis
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:09 PM
They should've reduced Birmingham's draw to just 32 then :lol: It just doesn't make sense for Birmingham (international) to have a bigger draw than Eastbourne (Premier).

WTA wants to reduce Birmingham's draw to 32 and add another grass tourney that week. But they have failed to find another tournament so far.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:09 PM
They should've reduced Birmingham's draw to just 32 then :lol: It just doesn't make sense for Birmingham (international) to have a bigger draw than Eastbourne (Premier).

Why?
Players need match practice on the surface.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:12 PM
WTA wants to reduce Birmingham's draw to 32 and add another grass tourney that week. But they have failed to find another tournament so far.

Oh now that makes sense. They should add another tourney that week and reduce Birmingham's draw to 32. Hope they can find a tournament soon.

Why?
Players need match practice on the surface.

But the points distribution in Birmingham is a bit sadistic in my opinion. :lol:

Jose.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:14 PM
Monterrey is the only event played the week before Indian Wells and it only has 32 draw. They should switch Birmingham's and Eastbourne's week then. So Birmingham is played at the same week as 's-Hertogenbosch and switch the draw for Eastbourne (56) and Birmingham (32).

But then in the week after Roland Garros it would be a premier event. And since roadmap it can't happen.

AdeyC
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:14 PM
Why?
Players need match practice on the surface.

Eastbourne used to have a plate event (not sure if they still do) - most of the first round losers would play in it to get more match practice.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:17 PM
But then in the week after Roland Garros it would be a premier event. And since roadmap it can't happen.

So the best solution is to add another tourney that week and reduce Birmingham's draw to 32 like what WTA is trying to do. Hope they can find the tournament soon.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:19 PM
Eastbourne used to have a plate event (not sure if they still do) - most of the first round losers would play in it to get more match practice.

Yeah, now I remember this. It's actually a very good idea. But I just don't see what's wrong with 56-player draw at Birmingham. :shrug:

Jose.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:22 PM
So the best solution is to add another tourney that week and reduce Birmingham's draw to 32 like what WTA is trying to do. Hope they can find the tournament soon.

Yeah. But I don't see a grasscourt event that can actually be a WTA event in the future. :shrug:
Nottingham comes to mind but having 2 tournament in same week, in United Kingdom runned by LTA would be weird :angel:

AdeyC
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:25 PM
Yeah. But I don't see a grasscourt event that can actually be a WTA event in the future. :shrug:
Nottingham comes to mind but having 2 tournament in same week, in United Kingdom runned by LTA would be weird :angel:

There also used to be a great grass court event at Beckenham, which was always the second week of the French Open, both men and women. If any big names lost in the first week of the French they'd often play there, Martina skipped the French a few times and played there.

The best thing of all though was that it was three streets away from where I lived when I was a kid.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:28 PM
Yeah. But I don't see a grasscourt event that can actually be a WTA event in the future. :shrug:
Nottingham comes to mind but having 2 tournament in same week, in United Kingdom runned by LTA would be weird :angel:

They should start a new tournament outside UK then but I know it isn't easy as they still haven't managed to find one.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:32 PM
Maybe it's just way too expensive to organise a brand new WTA-only Mickey Mouse event on grass. :shrug:

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:36 PM
Maybe it's just way too expensive to organise a brand new WTA-only Mickey Mouse event on grass. :shrug:

I guess so.

HenryMag.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:38 PM
Newport in Birmingham week :spit:

Why not make Queens a combined event? :shrug:

tommystar
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:56 PM
Halle should have a WTA Tournament too.

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:57 PM
Halle should have a WTA Tournament too.

I agree.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 06:59 PM
Newport in Birmingham week :spit:

Why not make Queens a combined event? :shrug:

Queen's is a 56-player draw.

Joe.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:04 PM
Eastbourne used to have a plate event (not sure if they still do) - most of the first round losers would play in it to get more match practice.

Yeah they used to, but ever since the men came it doesn't run anymore. :fiery: Neither does the junior event. :(

Joe.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:05 PM
If they bring a new WTA Grass event for Birmingham week, I would like it to stay in the UK. Why not just add another week to the grass season...? :unsure:

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:09 PM
^ Yeah, too few grass tournaments and the grass season is too short. I wish we have a longer grass season with more tournaments.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:16 PM
If they bring a new WTA Grass event for Birmingham week, I would like it to stay in the UK. Why not just add another week to the grass season...? :unsure:

But how to find this additional week between Roland Garros and Wimbledon?

Chorophyll
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:19 PM
But how to find this additional week between Roland Garros and Wimbledon?

Fed Cup Who knows.

sammy01
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:23 PM
Newport in Birmingham week :spit:

Why not make Queens a combined event? :shrug:

having been to queens this week, there is no way it could fit anymore tennis in the space it has. it is very cramped as it is.

xan
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:24 PM
There was a proposal a couple of years ago to move Wimbledon back a week. That would extend the grass season a little, and generally get better weather for Wimbledon.

I don't know what happened. The proposal seems to have died. Maybe the US hardcourt events blocked it somehow.

AdeyC
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:28 PM
There was a proposal a couple of years ago to move Wimbledon back a week. That would extend the grass season a little, and generally get better weather for Wimbledon.

I don't know what happened. The proposal seems to have died. Maybe the US hardcourt events blocked it somehow.

Well last year there was only rain on one day - when it's like that the topic of bad weather dies down.

Dave.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:29 PM
having been to queens this week, there is no way it could fit anymore tennis in the space it has. it is very cramped as it is.

I just had that post quoted to say exactly the same thing. No way could they fit it in.


I also think it would go against the general feeling of the tournament. It's difficult to explain, but I just don't think a women's event would "fit in" there, unfortunately.


What day did you go? I was there on Tuesday!

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:29 PM
and we have 3 weeks of full MM events after Wimbledon :help:

Joe.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:32 PM
But how to find this additional week between Roland Garros and Wimbledon?

It wouldn't hurt making the season 1 week longer. :angel:

Joe.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:34 PM
and we have 3 weeks of full MM events after Wimbledon :help:

Goood point. Why not just ditch one week of those events.

sammy01
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:36 PM
I just had that post quoted to say exactly the same thing. No way could they fit it in.


I also think it would go against the general feeling of the tournament. It's difficult to explain, but I just don't think a women's event would "fit in" there, unfortunately.


What day did you go? I was there on Tuesday!

i know what you mean, it has a different feeling to a joint tournament or omens one.

i went on the wednesday, only had a ground pass but seen as they were behind was great. saw nadal and murray play doubles.

it rained for an hour early on and everyone was packed into that tent with the shops in and the walkways between courts. the courts and stands seems to be packed in at any angle and wherever they can fit them.

Dave.
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:57 PM
i know what you mean, it has a different feeling to a joint tournament or omens one.

i went on the wednesday, only had a ground pass but seen as they were behind was great. saw nadal and murray play doubles.

it rained for an hour early on and everyone was packed into that tent with the shops in and the walkways between courts. the courts and stands seems to be packed in at any angle and wherever they can fit them.

Yeah I only got a ground pass too as I only really went to see one player. I did see Roddick, Murray, Nadal all practice and Djokovic was playing doubles on Court 9 (I was more focused on Ct 10 though)

The rain was terrible when I went. It was raining for most of the time I was queuing. :sobbing:
And yeah you could hardly even move in those sheltered areas when it was raining so I just went out of the grounds to some shop, and also because there was no way I was paying £3 for a bottle of water. :lol: :o

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 07:59 PM
Goood point. Why not just ditch one week of those events.

What's the point of having grasscourt MM after Wimbledon?

Ferg
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:02 PM
I dont see any reason why they should reduce the draw, its giving a lot of the lower ranked girls to have proper match practice before Wimbledon.

sammy01
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:03 PM
Yeah I only got a ground pass too as I only really went to see one player. I did see Roddick, Murray, Nadal all practice and Djokovic was playing doubles on Court 9 (I was more focused on Ct 10 though)

The rain was terrible when I went. It was raining for most of the time I was queuing. :sobbing:
And yeah you could hardly even move in those sheltered areas when it was raining so I just went out of the grounds to some shop, and also because there was no way I was paying £3 for a bottle of water. :lol: :o

well i met scoobs from here and mtf (as well as eliane, fenna and hall from mtf) and scoobs was so prepared lol. he had brought food and drinks and my underground ticket.

i was really lucky wednesday it rained for about an 1.30 then dry and a beautiful evening. i saw roddick practice to, nadal sent the crowd wild in doubles as did the murrays.

i did buy a towel for me and a programe, but got the programe signed by momo for kim (legend1) as well as a tennis ball.

actually it all went really well, i can tick momo off my list of players met now.

sammy01
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:05 PM
What's the point of having grasscourt MM after Wimbledon?

he means move wimbledon back a week and lose a week of the clay MM tournies that are after.

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:07 PM
he means move wimbledon back a week and lose a week of the clay MM tournies that are after.

This ain't gonna happen so why even discuss this scenario?

sammy01
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:08 PM
This ain't gonna happen so why even discuss this scenario?

what else would we do with our lives on a friday night then :sad:

Ferg
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:10 PM
This ain't gonna happen so why even discuss this scenario?

Maybe the WTA will snatch more ideas from the site??

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:11 PM
Maybe the WTA will snatch more ideas from the site??

But WTA doesn't run slams anyway :bigcry:

Julian.
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:15 PM
^ ITF then :rolls:

TheBoiledEgg
Jun 11th, 2010, 08:30 PM
But how to find this additional week between Roland Garros and Wimbledon?

evertime there is a calendar shift when Roland Garros goes 1 week earlier, Wimbledon always does the same, why dont Wimbledon stick in same spot, then you'd have 3 week gap.

There's sometimes 8 weeks before US Open and sometimes 7.
and likewise, 7 weeks after Miami or 8.

xan
Jun 11th, 2010, 09:44 PM
Wimbledon has not moved back a week. It has always occupied the same weeks in the modern period.

What Wimbledon SHOULD do is start a week later - giving the grass season an extra week. If some minor clay tournaments didn't like it - tough! Wimbledon is not beholden to them.

Wimbledon can do what it likes and the other tournaments would have to adapt. I say go ahead - the grass season is far too short ATM. I actually feel the major block is getting all the corporate hangers-on who buy tickets to change their dates.

LCS
Jun 11th, 2010, 09:55 PM
They should get Birmingham a category of its own inside the MM stuff. This meant they could award players more points per round. :shrug:

GeeTee
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:13 PM
2011 Schedule

Roland Garros
Roland Garros
Birmingham (32) & Halle (32)
Eastbourne (56)
Nottingham (32) & Rosmalen (32)
Wimbledon
Wimbledon

I wish..

fouc
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:22 PM
I think Birmingham is the only International tournament with a huge draw (56 instead of 32). Why don't they switch the draw for Birmingham and Eastbourne or maybe switch the tournaments' status? It just doesn't make sense to me. :unsure:

there are 128-Q draws at 10k tournaments, and these tournaments are not Grand Slams. :tape:

stangtennis
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:23 PM
I think Birmingham is the only International tournament with a huge draw (56 instead of 32).
Correct, I just checked the 2010 WTA Tour Tournament Calendar (http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/Calendar/0,,12781,00.html) and Birmingham is the only International tournament with more than 32 singles players. Still only 16 doubles pairs though.
Some of the Premier 5 tournaments with 56 singles players has 28 doubles pairs while others only have 16 doubles pairs.

dsanders06
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:23 PM
Believe it or not, the ONLY reason they can't move Wimbledon back a week is because the Newport men's event refuses to give up it's slot in the week after Wimbledon. That's right - the least prestigious event on the calendar is effectively dictating the timing of a Grand Slam.

If Newport just moved to the week after RG, everything would work so much smoother. The American male players could still play Newport as they all lose at RG early anyway (in fact, they could maybe even tempt Roddick to play it if they moved it to then as Wimbledon practice), then they could push all the current grass season back a week (including Wimbledon) - which would mean that the RG winner would have a two-week gap between the end of RG and Eastbourne, with Wimbledon the following week.

stangtennis
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:30 PM
They should get Birmingham a category of its own inside the MM stuff. This meant they could award players more points per round. :shrug:
The ranking system might seem strange that way, because you don't get more points for winning a 56S International than a 32S International (280 points in both cases).
However it's the same issue with Premier tournaments, you don't get more points for winning a 56S Premier than winning a 32S Premier (470 points in both cases).

But on the other hand you get more points for winning a 32S qualifier (4 rounds) than a 56S qualifier (only 3 rounds). So the doesn't seem to be any consistency here, since qualifiers are rewarded for winning one more round, but main draw players are not rewarded for winning one more round.

http://www.tennisforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=55264&d=1275037490

duhcity
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:42 PM
Believe it or not, the ONLY reason they can't move Wimbledon back a week is because the Newport men's event refuses to give up it's slot in the week after Wimbledon. That's right - the least prestigious event on the calendar is effectively dictating the timing of a Grand Slam.

If Newport just moved to the week after RG, everything would work so much smoother. The American male players could still play Newport as they all lose at RG early anyway (in fact, they could maybe even tempt Roddick to play it if they moved it to then as Wimbledon practice), then they could push all the current grass season back a week (including Wimbledon) - which would mean that the RG winner would have a two-week gap between the end of RG and Eastbourne, with Wimbledon the following week.

Source?
Because while Newport is a great event (I like it), it sounds like complete bullshit that it can dictate what Wimbledon wants to do.

And I'm fine with the grass season. While it would be nice if it were longer, the RG-Wimbledon double is prestigious because it's just so difficult to do in such a short span of time. I don't think that should change. It'd be like adding a week or two between IW and Miami. It would degrade the accomplishment of it.

LightWarrior
Jun 11th, 2010, 10:42 PM
Believe it or not, the ONLY reason they can't move Wimbledon back a week is because the Newport men's event refuses to give up it's slot in the week after Wimbledon.



Yeah right, you're funny.

Julian.
Jun 12th, 2010, 06:19 AM
I don't get why the hell Newport which is played on grass is played the week after Wimbledon. :tape:

Chorophyll
Jun 12th, 2010, 06:21 AM
Believe it or not, the ONLY reason they can't move Wimbledon back a week is because the Newport men's event refuses to give up it's slot in the week after Wimbledon. That's right - the least prestigious event on the calendar is effectively dictating the timing of a Grand Slam.

If Newport just moved to the week after RG, everything would work so much smoother. The American male players could still play Newport as they all lose at RG early anyway (in fact, they could maybe even tempt Roddick to play it if they moved it to then as Wimbledon practice), then they could push all the current grass season back a week (including Wimbledon) - which would mean that the RG winner would have a two-week gap between the end of RG and Eastbourne, with Wimbledon the following week.

Where did you find this bit of information at?

Joe.
Jun 12th, 2010, 07:23 AM
Sorry guys, but a 56 player draw would not work in Eastbourne. :rolls:

AnnaK_4ever
Jun 12th, 2010, 11:31 AM
evertime there is a calendar shift when Roland Garros goes 1 week earlier, Wimbledon always does the same, why dont Wimbledon stick in same spot, then you'd have 3 week gap.


You mean, so that we'd have 3 weeks between RG and Wimbledon once each 7 years?

HenryMag.
Jun 12th, 2010, 12:10 PM
Queen's is a 56-player draw.

Make it 32-draw, it's pathetic a 1R win only gives 10 ranking points, you can get more on a strong challenger event.

I think Halle as a combined event would probably be the better solution.

AdeyC
Jun 12th, 2010, 01:49 PM
Sorry guys, but a 56 player draw would not work in Eastbourne. :rolls:

A 64 player draw did in the 70's, 80's and early 90's

Serenus Christ
Jun 12th, 2010, 02:08 PM
A 64 player draw did in the 70's, 80's and early 90's

:rolleyes: he said a 56 draw won't work, not a 64.

denny5576
Jun 12th, 2010, 03:17 PM
This is only another example that the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points have very little to do with the tennis side of the question "Why is 56-draw Birmingham an International and 32-draw Eastbourne a Premier?". When the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points will not be based on the money, then we can look for a tennis meaning & purpose.
When the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points will not be based on the money? Never, with the current WTA management.

AdeyC
Jun 12th, 2010, 03:49 PM
:rolleyes: he said a 56 draw won't work, not a 64.

Ya I know that - but its the same difference.

stangtennis
Jun 12th, 2010, 03:53 PM
I doubt Wimbledon are worried about Newport.

But I have however often heard the main reason Wimbledon isn't moved back a week or two is because of Tour de France 3 week cycling stage race. A lot of people is not aware of this, but Tour de France is actually the world's most viewed annual sport event on TV and the 3 week Tour de France race begins the weekend Wimbledon ends each year. So if Wimbledon was moved back a week or two they would have to compete for selling TV-rights and compete for sport TV-viewers against the world's most viewed annual sport event.

In fact the only two sport events in the world to have more TV-viewers than Tour de France are the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup, but both are only held every 4th year, in contrast to Tour de France which is held every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_de_France#Broadcasting
The sale of international rights has given the Tour the world's largest viewing figures for an annual sports event and the third highest figures for any sports event. The two top events are the Olympic Games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Games) and the soccer World Cup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup), each held every four years.

denny5576
Jun 12th, 2010, 10:01 PM
I have however often heard the main reason Wimbledon isn't moved back a week or two is because of Tour de France 3 week cycling stage race. A lot of people is not aware of this, but Tour de France is actually the world's most viewed annual sport event on TV and the 3 week Tour de France race begins the weekend Wimbledon ends each year. So if Wimbledon was moved back a week or two they would have to compete for selling TV-rights and compete for sport TV-viewers against the world's most viewed annual sport event.

Yes, it is true. That's one of the main reasons why it will be very big mistake to move Wimbledon one week later. It even does not matter is the Tour de France the most viewed annual sport event on TV or not. Important is that TV cannot have simultaneously several hours per day tennis and Tour de France. And we are not talking about few countries but many...
Wimbledon 2009 had TV audience of 379 million and was shown in 182 countries. This year expectations are more than 400 million to watch Wimbledon on TV.

terjw
Jun 12th, 2010, 10:59 PM
This is only another example that the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points have very little to do with the tennis side of the question "Why is 56-draw Birmingham an International and 32-draw Eastbourne a Premier?". When the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points will not be based on the money, then we can look for a tennis meaning & purpose.
When the categories of the tournaments and the ranking points will not be based on the money? Never, with the current WTA management.

What rubbish. All I can say is thank God we have the current WTA management and not you in charge if you are advocating that Birmingham should be a Premier and Eastbourne an International. :rolleyes: .

Do you actually think the field at Birmingham is anything like that at Eastbourne. In terms of top players competing - Eastbourne has recently been one of the toughest on the tour. You only have to look at the matches in the 1st round - many of these are on a par with the SF at Birmingham and someone like Alek Wozniak who's a seed at Birmingham has to get through the Qualies at Eastbourne.