I'm finding more players and more fans are only caring about the Grandslams.
We all have different opinions and preferences (depending how it effects our fave).
I always thought of it as more of a year tour then just the big four but I started watching because of Martina and she plays the tour.
I think players who only turn up to grandslams or just before are coming in FRESHER and getting all the Rewards the other girls have put in to make the tour and the womens game what it is.
I also feel by only competing in this way your eliminating Rivalries and it's a disadvantage to the other players. Never coming up against you and finding a way to beat you. With so many top players doing this it hurts the growth of young players. They have less opportunity to see where the top level is at.
The only way I think this can change is if players had to play a minimum of regualr tour events before being allowed to play at grandslams. Players out for long injuries, surgeries etc would have an exemption.
I'm interested to see what people think. Post away and also vote.
Mar 8th, 2007, 03:01 AM
I disagree with your observation.
Take a look at the number of tournaments people play. Serena is just about the lowest, she plays 10-13 tournaments a year. (Oddly, the same number Steffi Graf played.) EVERYBODY else plays more. Check the top ten
On top of that, remember the players who WIN tournaments play more matches.
Jsnkovic played 28 tournaments last year, with 72 matches.
Sharapova played only 15 tournaments. And 68 matches.
Almost the same number of matches in a little over half the tournaments. Why should Sharapova be forced to overplay, and risk injury, because she's better than 99% of the tour?
On the practical side, the WTA doesn't run the slams. In fact, the creation of the WTA was a rebellion against the organization that runs the slams. Do you realy think the ITF is going to NOT invite Serena to play a slam because she fails to meet an artificial WTA minimum? This I doubt. Remember, at one point in 2003, Serena was #1 despite having only played EIGHT tournaments in the previous 12 months. You'll find the roughly the same thing in Steffi Graf's history. That's what happens when you're better than everybody else.
Mar 8th, 2007, 03:09 AM
This is a very interesting idea. It could work but I see a lot of protests. The rankings are supposed to take care of that but with all the special things they give former champions they can get wildcards whenever they like and enter any grandslam as fresh as they can be without playing any tournament beforehand.
Mar 8th, 2007, 03:11 AM
Every horse was not meant to run alike. If your game is good enough that it is sufficient for you to play a couple of tournaments and enter a grandslam and be successful, then good for you. If you require 10 tournament to get you in shape then that is fine. You can't regulate the amount of practice a player needs
Mar 8th, 2007, 04:42 AM
I also feel by only competing in this way your eliminating Rivalries and it's a disadvantage to the other players. Never coming up against you and finding a way to beat you. With so many top players doing this it hurts the growth of young players. They have less opportunity to see where the top level is at.This isn't a new phnomena. See Graf.
Yet it doesn't seem to have harmed Sharapova. Or Henin. Or Serena. n fact, Serena is the perfect case. Because she plays so little, SHE has less of an opportunity to figure out how to beat people. So she certainly isn't operating at an advantage. (Well, okay. Being a better player than everyone else on the tour IS an advantage. But that's not what we're discussing here.)
Mar 8th, 2007, 04:45 AM
It should be their choice......if they are good enough just to play slams and win.....not to mention names.....let it be........
Mar 8th, 2007, 04:56 AM
If a player plays many events and can't win a slam, than that's the player's problem that they are not good enough to win a slam. End of story!!
Mar 8th, 2007, 05:18 AM
who other than serena and venus are you talking about? you have to qualify to play in a slam already.