PDA

View Full Version : Tashkent cancelled?........


niceman
May 12th, 2003, 09:52 PM
man, there are less and less tournaments to be played on the tour,
is it gonna get worse next year.... :rolleyes:

CanadianBoy21
May 12th, 2003, 11:02 PM
it is sort of good, and sort of bad that there are less tournie.
Good because top players need rest, and when they meet they will be rested to give it their all, also there is more chances of them meeting if their is less tournaments, they will be playing more the same of tournies.
Bad because fans from other countries don't get to see these players. Lesser ranked players won't have a greatchance of winning tournie, because their will be less, and they would have to play more tournies where top players are. so if u like some players ranked below, u would hate to see them get smoke 6-0 6-0 by a top player and maybe not even be able to enter tournie because of their ranking.

F-R-E-A-K
May 13th, 2003, 01:11 AM
Well said SuperDevil! Time will tell the story everybody!

Ted of Teds Tennis
May 13th, 2003, 01:13 AM
SuperDevil:

The problem is that most of the tournaments getting cancelled aren't the ones that top players play. I don't think Tashkent had one Top 20 player in the past four years; Porto may have had one in ASV the year she played.

The lower ranked players need these tournaments to get them enough prize money to keep their WTA membership.

rated_next
May 13th, 2003, 01:44 AM
I agree. There seems to be so little tier III's IV's and V's now

Rtael
May 13th, 2003, 01:46 AM
:rolleyes: get a fucking clue, if the top players don't want to overplay themselves, then they shouldn't overplay themselves....it has NOTHING to do with the number of fucking tournies that they are ABLE to enter.... geeze....and losing tournies is bad especially in areas where the tennis fans aren't oo numerous because it can get more tennis fans and more people playing tennis (hopefully!) And it's also bad because the lower-ranked players NEED these tournies to ever get a chance to play...the less tournaments there are, the higher ranked the players will be that enter them thus leaving less room for lower ranked players

Mattographer
May 13th, 2003, 02:11 AM
Also, it's so stupid to put in middle of grass season along with Vienna on clay :rolleyes:

Leena
May 13th, 2003, 02:13 AM
About damn time that Tashkent got cancelled... that tournament is your definition of dead weight.

Leena
May 13th, 2003, 02:14 AM
:rolleyes: get a fucking clue, if the top players don't want to overplay themselves, then they shouldn't overplay themselves....it has NOTHING to do with the number of fucking tournies that they are ABLE to enter.... geeze....and losing tournies is bad especially in areas where the tennis fans aren't oo numerous because it can get more tennis fans and more people playing tennis (hopefully!) And it's also bad because the lower-ranked players NEED these tournies to ever get a chance to play...the less tournaments there are, the higher ranked the players will be that enter them thus leaving less room for lower ranked players
That's what challengers and qualifying are for.

The best players should play the best players... and the scrubs can play the scrubs, and hopefully work their way up.

niceman
May 13th, 2003, 05:01 AM
That's what challengers and qualifying are for.

The best players should play the best players... and the scrubs can play the scrubs, and hopefully work their way up.
actually that's what Tier I and Tier II events are for.......
Tier III events are mostly jumping boards,

but Tashkent is Tier IV...........
Tier IV and Tier V are for lower ranked youngsters
who possess the potentials to play for points and exposure,
or for veterans to come back for.....
why would they want to cancel this event..
i understand it's bad scheduling,
but it can still fit well along with
Dubia/Doha periods...............

what's the difference b/w winning Tier V and
winning both 25K+H and 75K+H challenger events?
you actually get less prize money and points for WTA events,
u know, players can just play challenger and high Tier qualies
and get high in the ranking,
but low tier events are there for a reason,

maybe some people dont really care
about people who are ranked lower than 20,
or even lower than TOP 10.......hell, lower than Serena or Venus,
but that doesnt mean lower ranked players dont exist,
so absolutely disagree with the way WTA organizes the events,

how can you possibly add bonus money to Rome,
get all those prize money up for high Tier events,
and promote Antwerps Warsaw etc. for top players
while canceling low tier events so those
lower ranked players cant have their ends meet,
that just doesnt make sense to me. :rolleyes:


lower Tier events are there coz they need be.....

Mattographer
May 13th, 2003, 05:12 AM
Sandrine Testud commited it in two years ago but withdrew...

King Lindsay
May 13th, 2003, 07:06 AM
Good. We don't need the number of events we have now. They aren't all profitable, and they aren't all viable. So why should we have the ones that aren't?

spiceboy
May 17th, 2003, 11:59 AM
...and wait til the end of season :rolleyes: :rolleyes: with the SARS thing Shangai Tier II is virtually out and I doubt Bali & Pattaya City will be played either.
At least things look better in the last days for Toronto and Tokyo :)

King Lindsay
May 17th, 2003, 01:19 PM
...and wait til the end of season :rolleyes: :rolleyes: with the SARS thing Shangai Tier II is virtually out and I doubt Bali & Pattaya City will be played either.
At least things look better in the last days for Toronto and Tokyo :)

i think those events will be fine, SARS or not.

Experimentee
May 17th, 2003, 01:28 PM
Thats too bad. There arent many tournaments in that part of the world, and it was great that fans there got to see some tennis, but now thats been taken away.

tennischick
May 17th, 2003, 02:27 PM
any cancellation of any tourny is bad for the sport. how can attrition of any kind be good?

ASV
May 17th, 2003, 04:40 PM
this sucks. tashkent rocked!