PDA

View Full Version : What should I do to make the JUNIOR tour more interesting?


Yak
Apr 25th, 2003, 12:47 PM
Some people are very good at critisizing but when it comes to submit ideas to make it better, they don't!

So, what should I do to make the Junior tour more interestings?

I expect at least an idea from AKFan#1!

TatiAnnahølic
Apr 25th, 2003, 12:51 PM
You expected too much... ;)

wongqks
Apr 25th, 2003, 12:52 PM
Dave


You are doing a fine job, don't worry about it at all that some people moan, I have to admit I never play that much junior tour :o, it is indeed quite hard to keep track of two players and really involve in it.

Also, there are less drama and articles on the junior tour (which without it in pro tour, FWTT will never grow in the first place) In the end it comes down to the fact that many players view junior tour as a stepping stone to the pro tour. Some established player view using junior tour to test out some points. Some players does not feel as attached in the junior tour because they know they will be promoted after half a year.

I really can't think of anything you can do to make it better coz you are doing such a great job :)

wongqks
Apr 25th, 2003, 12:54 PM
Also one more reason is that not many people follow junior result, so those tournament names does not mean anything.

I know it sounds weird but actually reducing the no. of tournament plays (ie just having one tournament in a week) will actually help, and scrap the whole junior tier system, and invent your own system,same as pro tour will actually help and more people will understand

wongqks
Apr 25th, 2003, 12:56 PM
OMG you got me thinking LOL, I think one more thing you can do is to restrict the no of WC for juniors to pro events to Grand Slam only and then each time a junior player won an junior event, she is granted a WC to a pro event of their choice subject to availability

Monica_Rules
Apr 25th, 2003, 02:24 PM
Some good stuff there.

There just doesn't seem to be an atmospher in Juniors if players wrote more articles had a bit of rivalry going on!

Lee-Waters' Boy
Apr 25th, 2003, 02:32 PM
I agree that maybe holding junior events w/ the same name as pro events might increase interest. I'd be happier to win the junior Family Circle Cup than the Junior Manilla, Phillipines Reebok Bowl or something like that ;)

Scotso
Apr 25th, 2003, 03:28 PM
I agree about the names of the tournaments, but the tier system isn't that difficult to grasp.

I think you do a fine job.

Randy H
Apr 25th, 2003, 05:03 PM
i agree, you do a fine job with the game.

i think the tournament names are fine, it makes no difference in my opinion, and i prefer the realism.

i think the only problem with the juniors is that essentially, there is little for one to aim for long term. those that have pro players know that their junior can only go so far and can't make it to pros unless they retire their pro player, and the juniors know that after about 6 months they are going to move up to pros anyway. there just isn't much of a long term goal to obtain like there is in the pros.

whether there is something that can be done, i don't know, but i think you are doing the best you can anyway :)

Yak
Apr 25th, 2003, 05:29 PM
I agree with some of what has been said!

I've always said that before, with Tennis124 running the game, juniors had to finish in the top5 to join the pro tour.

I also remember when I asked Alx for a WC in Indian Wells and Key Biscane, I had to beg! Now, juniors just get it without even having good junior results!

I think a junior could get a WC in a pro event if the event is played in the native country. For the other WC, I think it should be awarded with performance instead of how it is.

For the tournament name, I think it should stay the same. As far as the interviews go, I think it should be a must for everyone to post some sometimes.

wongqks
Apr 25th, 2003, 05:40 PM
how about scraping wildcard system and only reward wc if it is from your country (unless you come form USA which you are only allow one :p ) and only give wildcard to tournaments winner? this way people will love to fight for the juniors to play some pro events ;)

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 26th, 2003, 12:22 AM
A few things will probably happen next year -- juniors will only be able to enter 6-8 events next year.

Also, there might be a "play-in" if a junior wins a big tournament (like GS, Grade A, etc.) to a pro draw.

The bad thing for junior tour is that juniors play 1/2 pros and 1/2 juniors (I do this myself too). So, if we can limit juniors playing pros, it will encourage better junior events. And if people get mad, then they won't play, and then there will be less useless players that never post or anything ;)

FLL
Apr 26th, 2003, 12:29 AM
I think we should start this after the French Open. Why wait?

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 26th, 2003, 01:27 AM
Because people will complain if there are limits on junior players after being told there could be 10 events this year....trust me.

I wouldn't mind starting then either, but it would have to be a general agreement.

FLL
Apr 26th, 2003, 01:38 AM
What I meant is starting the pro WC based on performance

polishprodigy
Apr 26th, 2003, 04:10 AM
I think you're doing a great job Rus4Ever. Personally, I think that juniors should have the right to play challengers (obviously a limit) and then perhaps get play-ins based on results in juniors into pro tournies. The problem then arises though, the next year when that junior must DEFEND those pro points yet they do not get the play-in as they did not repeat their junior performance, what do you do? Its kind of not fair to the player to not give them a WC.....


This is a complicated thing. But you are doing a great job with Juniors. I kinda get frustrated as my junior player is so inconsistent :rolleyes: ;)

spencercarlos
Apr 26th, 2003, 11:36 AM
I think the number limit 10 for juniors to play pros are just fine.
I think there should be an ONLY event (lower Tier event?) during each week where Juniors can play. It can make it easier for you to have track of the players.
That can make sense a little since you don`t see that many Junior players being wildcards at events, except Grand Slams, in REAL tennis :p ;)

Ops i almost forgot
You do an excelent job :) :wavey:

Yak
Apr 26th, 2003, 02:39 PM
Thanks!

Alberto
Apr 26th, 2003, 02:53 PM
Don´t force players to send points everyweek

anabel
Apr 26th, 2003, 05:14 PM
I like the names idea. It would be better to play Berlin Rome or Madrid juniors, than playing tournaments which name are not able to remember.

Plus that would give the chance to a junior player to play both events. I mean, if a junior is playing Berlin with a WC, she cant play juniors that week, but if she is playing Berlin with a WC and Berlin jrs, she would not miss that week.

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 26th, 2003, 05:25 PM
Good point Anabel -- but what it could do, is like the winner of Berlin juniors could be a play-in to Rome pros.....get it?

I like that idea.

Lee-Waters' Boy
Apr 26th, 2003, 05:36 PM
And maybe get rid of the 10 event rule all together. There could be play ins the week before and then only that junior could play in the pro event the following week. The exception could be that all junior and pros can play in grand slams. There could also be wildcards given at Joshua's discretion for defending champs or home country players.

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 26th, 2003, 05:41 PM
Yes, I think is a good idea because some people is good for them to play in home events.

Of course we want Grand Slams to have many players, so all could play there ;)

Yak
Apr 26th, 2003, 05:59 PM
Ok! I'll change the name of the event starting after Roland Garros.

And after Roland Garros, I'll use your previous points if you don't send anything but for a maximum of 2 events! After you lose walkover!

Yak
Apr 26th, 2003, 06:01 PM
And maybe get rid of the 10 event rule all together. There could be play ins the week before and then only that junior could play in the pro event the following week. The exception could be that all junior and pros can play in grand slams. There could also be wildcards given at Joshua's discretion for defending champs or home country players.

I like that! But maybe not every week!

Yak
Apr 26th, 2003, 06:04 PM
Josh, can you talk about that with Alek and make him approve ;) We could start the system below after Roland Garros.

-Make the junior tournament in the same cities, at the same time then a pro tournament so that junior can still play juniors if they get WC in pro events.

-After Roland Garros, I'll use previous points if you don't send anything but for a maximum of 2 events! After you lose walkover!

-The week before selected events, junior tournament winners will get a play-in in that selected event.

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 27th, 2003, 02:08 AM
k, Rus....I will :)

Yak
Apr 27th, 2003, 02:40 AM
k, Rus....I will :)

Thanks Josh!!!

Randy H
Apr 29th, 2003, 02:52 PM
I'm not sure I understand the point in reducing the 10 WC's a year rule.

If we're only allowed to play 30 events in juniors through the year anyway, then what difference does it make if we decide to use the free weeks to enter pro events, particularly if your ranking is sufficient enough to get in without asking for a wilcard? (which in most cases it is assuming you now which events to enter, and don't mind going through qualifying if necessary).

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 30th, 2003, 12:25 AM
There are only about 37 "playing weeks" a year, so I think it's very fair.

Juniors belong in the juniors unless special exceptions. And if you do play pro, it should be a special reason -- like you won a junior event for a play-in spot, or it is your home country, or it is a grand slam.

I think it makes the system much more efficient and less redundant.

Lee-Waters' Boy
Apr 30th, 2003, 02:12 AM
The point of getting rid of the 10 tournament rule is to increase participation in juniors, which was the goal from the first place. If my player can play in 10 pro events a year, plus the second week of major events..thats about 16 weeks a year that she will be a pro. If I only got in via wildcards, grand slams, or play ins that increases the number of junior tourneys, and increases my motivation to do well in juniors.

Sam L
Apr 30th, 2003, 02:16 AM
Some good stuff there.

There just doesn't seem to be an atmospher in Juniors if players wrote more articles had a bit of rivalry going on!

I used to try writing some but nobody seems interested.

Randy H
Apr 30th, 2003, 01:29 PM
Well I don't see the point in having the 2nd week of slams and Miami/IW as a free week for juniors anyway, I think it is pointless, since the juniors should be playing in the Junior slams in the second week of slams. If anything, I think that those weeks should be counted out as free weeks for juniors, not cutting down the general rule of 10 pro events allowed in the year. My junior intends to play only 10 events in the year, not 16 because of the 'free' events.

As far as I'm concerned this rule isn't going to encourage others to play more juniors, because the fact is it is generally going to be the same culprits who are not regularly sending in their points in the junior events. Whether they commit to the events or not makes no difference if they don't bother sending in points and are essentially just walkover names for those of us who do send in our points with each event we enter.

I also think it is unrealistic to say that a junior player would only play the grand slams and their home nation events. What about players who don't have any event for the nation they are from, whereas countries like the States, or Australia have several opportunities for its players to receive wildcards.

The other idea about the play-ins is the the problem of bonus points for winning the junior events. I think bonus points are warranted, but the fact of the matter is that if you do well at the start of a surface's tournaments, then you have a good edge of winning further events on that surface as the season continues compared to others. This means that there is a bigger chance of a small few winning the majority of events, meaning they get even more play-in wildcards into events because they were fortunate enough to have a luckier week early on which provides them with a bonus point edge from the start. I have no problem with the bonus points giving you an edge on that surface, as I think it is realistic that if you win an event on that surface of course one should assume that you wi8ll be more confident, and play better and better on that surface, but it gives an unfair edge in the amount of wildcards into the tour events they will be given in comparison to some who maybe weren't so fortunate, or joined late, etc.

Lee-Waters' Boy
Apr 30th, 2003, 02:50 PM
My junior intends to play only 10 events in the year, not 16 because of the 'free' events.

As far as I'm concerned this rule isn't going to encourage others to play more juniors, because the fact is it is generally going to be the same culprits who are not regularly sending in their points in the junior events. Whether they commit to the events or not makes no difference if they don't bother sending in points and are essentially just walkover names for those of us who do send in our points with each event we enter.




Your junior might only play 10 but not many will follow that same rule of thumb. Of course if the 2nd week counted then more might.

Your next paragraph is dead on and is the best argument for not changing anything. Those who participate will, and its unlikely that those who don't ever will.

:hearts:

polishprodigy
Apr 30th, 2003, 04:26 PM
I agree with whatever Randy says ;) Reading his comments, they all make sense.

For my junior, I like playing those "free" challengers (which are generally made up of juniors as well) as they give me so cool experience in the pro field. I am a top junior, although this year I have found that when playing an event in pros it has conflicted with my commitments for juniors. So when I did not make committments for juniors, I am not playing pros but when I do make commmitments for juniors, I do make commitments for pros after the fact. That's why I havn't played juniors for the past 5 weeks, and I'm not happy about that.
I like the 10 rule idea, juniors is fun, but it definitely does not have the depth of pros, even low ranked pro events, and I agree with Randy in that you will find the same people getting WC's into events because the won junior tournies. I can tell you right now who they most likely will be : Nicoletta Lapentti, Lobacheva, Morkovina and occasionaly Krivencheva-molik ;)

Juniors is a hard thing to run, and I think that Rus4ever has done a good job of doing it. At least he likes the junior game and has an interest, unlike one of his predecessors :rolleyes: I commend Rus4ever on trying to make juniors better and more interesting.

Same as Sam L, I tried posting articles, but I stopped as no one really seemed to care and do the same.