PDA

View Full Version : Does WTA need its equivalent to ATP's Masters Series?


CamilleVidann
Aug 7th, 2003, 01:43 AM
I think it's a great idea for WTA to have its own version of Masters Series so more top players will play tier I events. Some of the top tier events suffer from pathetic draws and some secondary tier events have stronger fields. That must be corrected. ATP is doing a great job of dealing wth it giving making it obligatory for all the top players to play those formerly known super 9 events. What do you think?

CamilleVidann
Aug 7th, 2003, 02:34 AM
what's your take on this?

disposablehero
Aug 7th, 2003, 02:35 AM
ATP works because Masters Series events have ungodly huge purses. That bubble is going to burst.

F-R-E-A-K
Aug 7th, 2003, 02:37 AM
I think its an excellent idea to have a women's masters series, i reckon that it should be exactly the same as the men's running n'sync with there events for the masters only.

mboyle
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:03 AM
I had an idea of having the WTA have a bid. Anyone can offer money to run one of 5 tier one events in the calendar. All top 50 players would be required to play. The prizemoney bidding would start at 3 Million. Do you think that would be a good idea?

CamilleVidann
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:05 AM
Why does the prize purse have to be so huge to make it happen? I mean as long as WTA makes it a rule that the players have to abide by, the money should not be too big a problem. or are you talking about the money needed to promote the events?

mboyle
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:06 AM
no prizemoney. I mean, if all top players have to be there, you need to have the money.

CamilleVidann
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:08 AM
Why?

Gowza
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:22 AM
the bad thing about requiring players to player at cerain events in the prize money. in tier 1's the lower ranked players would always lose 1st or 2nd round and not earn enough. whereas if they're not required they can go to an event where they have a good chance in winning or going deep into it and earn the amount they need. i think this happens with young players sometimes. young players try to play the big events but they eventually have to play some lower tier events so they can get enough money to what they need to do.

Gowza
Aug 7th, 2003, 04:23 AM
it's a great idea in-terms of quality of play but maybe for other reasons it isn't quite as good.

PierceCheng
Aug 7th, 2003, 10:26 AM
Because like this only then is interesting!

You think? ;)

villa
Aug 7th, 2003, 11:56 AM
The masters take away some of the glamour from granslams- the prize money is about the same- the ranking points is about the same and hence some players aren't bottered weather its masters or a slam they win....

Dava
Aug 7th, 2003, 12:03 PM
Tier 1 events do need to be re-branded. WTA Mistresses would be inappropraite though.

TheBoiledEgg
Aug 7th, 2003, 12:10 PM
The masters take away some of the glamour from granslams- the prize money is about the same- the ranking points is about the same and hence some players aren't bottered weather its masters or a slam they win....

thats not true

Rank pts are only 50%
prize money is only half as well at all Masters compared to Slam winners, although you do get more for a TMS win than you do for winning AUS Open