View Full Version : Should WTA championship increase draws!!

Oct 11th, 2001, 12:44 AM
IThe WTA has only 16 players invited to the Championships and it's not fair for the other 16 who otherwise would have been seeded at a grand slam...if the grand slams have 32 seeds shouldn't the year-end have 32 players in the draw?...

The Wta should offer several players ranked below 32 in the rankings, a chance to play in the year end...because it'll be more like a chance for that player to experience the feeling of playing in the year end...especially if that player has not to the top 32 in five years on the tour...

If a player below 32 in rank and has more than five years on the tour they should be nominated for entry to the year-end....

The #1 and #2 players shoiuld draw those players.....

Oct 11th, 2001, 12:46 AM
I like how the Chase is and I think thats why you have the whole season to get up there. PLUS ITS NOT A GS!

[ October 10, 2001: Message edited by: VtennisA ]

Oct 11th, 2001, 12:47 AM
Well, the "Majors" do have 32, and I think the Chase should have the top 32 as well.

Oct 11th, 2001, 12:52 AM
It's only fair because the year end has only 16 seeds and the point of the grand slams were too also let the players know where they are when the GS rolled around...if you receive a seed then you are still in the running for the year end.....if you didn't receive a seed then you knew you had work to do....

If the GS seed 32 then the WTA should increase to 32 seeds.....

Oct 11th, 2001, 01:01 AM
I think it's stupid to take the first 32 ...

And a grand slam it's totally different, there you have 128 players at the main draw, at the chase championships only 16!!!

And the Atp-championship have always had 8 players... So I gues we may be happy with the 16 we have now <IMG SRC="smilies/wink.gif" border="0">

[ October 10, 2001: Message edited by: kimclijsters4ever ]

Oct 11th, 2001, 04:17 AM
I also donīt see any problems at all and have 32 seeds.. if we had 32 in all GS this year, why not put 32 seeds, also in a important tournament as GS, like Chase??
I think would happen more surprises, and the tournament would be more equilibrated. IMO <IMG SRC="smilies/wink.gif" border="0">

Oct 11th, 2001, 04:36 AM
If the choice would be mine, I'd do it the way ATP does. 8 instead of 16, and round-robin format. I just love round robin. Just imagine:

Group 1:
Hingis, Davenport, Clijsters, Serena
Group 2:
Capriati, Venus, Henin, Seles

And round robin.. That would be one hell of a tournament, one and only WTA tournament that would easily beat its ATP counterpart.

Williams Rulez
Oct 11th, 2001, 05:00 AM
I think 16 is enough. It is supposed to be an exclusive tournament. Besides as others pointed out, the ATP only has 8 people... so we should be glad!

Oct 11th, 2001, 06:37 AM
Well it would have to be in a venue were there were more indoor courts. Not sure what the site is in Munich but Madison Square Garden would be definitely out in the event it would increase to a draw of 32.

But I am one that likes the way the format is.

Oct 11th, 2001, 07:08 AM
In my opinion 16 is enough, but i don't like that they're playing like regular tournament.

it should be like the atp, using round robin system, but have 4 pools and 4 players in it.

they got paid a lot, and it's been a tough job for the players just to reach the top 16. and what do they got lost in the first round and goodbye....

using the orund robin would be a very good solution. and each players play at least 3 times. the winner of each pools will meet in the semi final

how do u guys like it?

Brian Stewart
Oct 11th, 2001, 12:59 PM
I like it the way it is now. Limiting it to 16 gives the tournament an elite feel, which it should have. It also gives the fall indoor season some drama, as players scramble for the remaining spots. If there were more spots available, the top 20 players would be playing less, and weaken the indoor fields.

Adding to the prestige is that it's the only tournament (slams included) to award significant points for a first round exit.

Oct 11th, 2001, 07:10 PM
i agree with ys make it the way the ATP Maters Cup is that way the top players will still be there and they will have all the to work to ensure they make it to the presigious year-end championships. Unless of course the tournament is moved and on of your guarenteed top players can't play!! <IMG SRC="smilies/mad.gif" border="0">

Togk 182
Oct 11th, 2001, 10:18 PM
i like the way it is, & besides if it becomes of 32 players then it won't be that interesting, but i would love if it becomes 16 teams instead of only 8

Oct 11th, 2001, 10:24 PM
Brian has made the best point against a 32 draw. It's hard enough to get the women to show up after the Open, even with money "under the table". Adding to the field reduces incentives.

If anything, I'm with ys in favoring a round robin, double elimination. This way the promotors are assured the big names are there at least 2 or 3 nights, not just a day <IMG SRC="smilies/smile.gif" border="0">

The argument that Munich must have 32 because the slams do doesn't hold up when you look at the lack of excitement in women's matches at Wimbledon and the US Open. Only one big upset happened, and that was due to
Hingis having a bad back.

[ October 11, 2001: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Oct 11th, 2001, 10:37 PM
Actually Rollo the French had one big upset : Schett over Venus.

If you count Mauresmo going out in the first round it had two upsets.

Oct 11th, 2001, 11:06 PM
EXACTLY Big Tennis Fan. The French had more early upsets BECAUSE the 32 seed wasn't in place. The change didn't happen until

PS . Sorry BTF, my original post said "French"
when I meant Us Open.

[ October 11, 2001: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Oct 12th, 2001, 02:27 AM
It's not a All-Comers event like a Slam. Its a year end championship for the best of the best, and should stay that way.

Oct 12th, 2001, 05:44 AM

The end of season championship final 16 is decided on a totally different basis to the seeds at slams anyway.

We are not talking about ranking players for seeding purpose in a draw.

The Championships is the best of the best from ONE year - nothing to do with seedings which are determined using the regular rankings which we all think mean nothing anyway!! <IMG SRC="smilies/tongue.gif" border="0">

[ October 12, 2001: Message edited by: Penne ]

Oct 12th, 2001, 05:50 AM
I love it the way it is, the only thing I would change is the players are seeded exactly how they finished.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 08:54 AM
Yes I too love the 16 Player format!!! ;) ;)

Apr 23rd, 2002, 09:03 AM
If anything, I want the draw to reduce to 8, to add a prestige into the event, and to make sure players who qualifies are players who dominate the tour that year. I mean can you imagine how great it would be to see a round robin format of the top 8 at the moment? It will be great

Apr 23rd, 2002, 09:48 AM
Actually I like the 16 players format! :D :D :D

Apr 23rd, 2002, 10:25 AM
it should stay to 16 players.

or try to make it round robin in some sort of way.

Currently only the top 15 are automatically guaranteed. the "16th" spot has always been left open for a WC but not been used.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 07:30 PM
The men's tour has a much deeper talent pool, and their year end championships are only for 8. 16 is the right number. This event is supposed to be elite player against elite player, every match.

Perhaps this will offend some people, but when I think of elite WTA players, Tamarine Tanasugarn, Anne Kremer, and Tatiana Panova do not qualify. And these are not the 30-32 players, that's 21-23.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 08:26 PM
I don't think it should change
It's fine the way it is !
altough the round robin-format wouldn't be so bad either

Serena y Monica
Apr 23rd, 2002, 08:36 PM
If anything I'd say the opposite. I'd love to see them drop to eight and do round robin like the men.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by TheBoiledEgg
it should stay to 16 players.

or try to make it round robin in some sort of way.

Currently only the top 15 are automatically guaranteed. the "16th" spot has always been left open for a WC but not been used.

really? what's the rule for that eggy? thanx :wavey:

i like the 16 player format - its not like the players dont know at the beginning of the year that the tournament doesn't exist, its a goal for them. and the 32 seeding system at the grand slam was only instituted b/c players thought it was unfair for the 17th ranked player to draw the 1st ranked player in the first round (im not sure what the exact reason was, but im pretty sure it had something to do w/ that). even thought that, its still unfair, b/c now its the same situation for the 33rd ranked player. it happened this year at the AO, actually. lina krasnaroutskaya was awarded the 33rd seed after the withdrawl of serena, and she played conchita martinez in rd. 1, ranked 34th at the time. so even w/ the institution of the extra group of seeds, it doesn't entriely satisfy everyone, but you can't ever do that. the 16 at the year-ends is a prestigous thing. only the top 16 make it there (well, apparently top 15, but i didnt know that) - its a big competition to play in the big competition. kinda ironic, huh?

Apr 23rd, 2002, 09:16 PM

At their sole discretion and taking into account extraordinary circumstances, the Sanex WTA Tour may select the 16th player for participation in the singles draw. if the Tour does not exercise its option to select the 16th player, the 16th spot in the draw will be awarded to the player who is 16th in Ranking (Round & Quality) Points at 2002 Tournaments.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 10:43 PM
In other words if a player with drawing power (translation-Anna Kournikova) might play, the WTA could put her in. This was done before, years ago, with Billie Jean King. Monica Seles would have played without earning enough points in 1995 except for a post-US Open injury.

Apr 23rd, 2002, 11:05 PM
thanx eggy and rollo - appreciate it! :D

wow, i can't believe they'd do that now - unless they thought someone would draw more people in, but honestly...w/ people like BJK and Monica, i c y that rule might have been invented, let alone used. that would really suck for the person in 16th place :p :rolleyes: :o

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:06 AM
I think there should be FEWER players, 8 or 12, and a round-robin format to make the championship DIFFERENT to all the other tournaments, and thus a little more interesting.

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:18 AM
I think they should stick with 16 players. Divide them into 4 pools and have round robin competition. The top 8 pllayers then go into the Quarterfinals and you'd continue from there. Or you could select the top player out of each group and go directly into the semifinals.

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:28 AM
I'm also confused. I know they use the championship points but if the season ends today would natalie still qualify for the championships. I mean her ranking would say she's top 16 ( not counting any recent ranking change ).

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:31 AM
Yeah they should round-robin it!!

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:40 AM
Hmmmm, Maccardel, I'm nto sure. If she had played this year she'd mostl likely be in the top 14. But since she's 'retired' I think theyd give the spot to someone whos had a great year, or Anna K.

Apr 24th, 2002, 12:58 AM
I was wondering lets say if she was stuck at 13 for awhile could she still have a valuble argument.

Apr 24th, 2002, 01:01 AM
Probably WTA would ask her, and if not they'd give the 13th place to the 14th ranked, and so on until 15 spots were taken.

Apr 24th, 2002, 01:04 AM
Originally posted by maccardel
I'm also confused. I know they use the championship points but if the season ends today would natalie still qualify for the championships. I mean her ranking would say she's top 16 ( not counting any recent ranking change ).

No, she would not be in the top 16 for the current race.

1 MARTINA HINGIS 1861.00 6
3 VENUS WILLIAMS 1671.00 7
4 MONICA SELES 1652.00 8
6 JUSTINE HENIN 972.00 8
10 KIM CLIJSTERS 678.00 4
11 PATTY SCHNYDER 647.00 9
12 ANNE KREMER 645.00 10
14 NATHALIE DECHY 604.00 10
15 JELENA DOKIC 599.00 8

Apr 24th, 2002, 01:18 AM

I rarely look at those rankings...

Janette Husarova a Top 16 Player!

Daniela in the Top 8!

Martina HINGIS still Number One!!!
It certainly gives things a different perspective.

As for the round Robin, I'd happily settle for Ryan's 16 player, 4 pool concept.

MaRKy MaRk
Apr 24th, 2002, 01:23 AM
Yeah, I prefer the 16 player format. 32 players would be too many for an exclusive tournament. It would almost be like a regular tournament (Example: Adidas International, where the cutoff was at 26). And some matches would be one-sided, which shouldn't happen for a top players event.

Round robin is also a good idea. Nearly all the match-ups would happen.

Just a question...In the ATP, if you win a Grand Slam and remain in the Top 20 for the remainder of the year, you're automatically entered in the Masters. Is it the same in the WTA? I think it should be...

Apr 24th, 2002, 01:28 AM
I understand the difference between race and regular tourney but if the season ended today, alot of players opn that list would qualify but yet their ranking do not coincide..won't that be controversial?

I think it would be if I'm Jelena and because I lost in the first round I'm still ranked number 8 and recently won a title( that's saying if she is replace in the race ranks by someone else below her in the actual rankings)

Apr 24th, 2002, 02:06 AM
this year might be a year in which they use the special WC system of letting a player into the championships. lindsay has been injured and is still in the top 10 entry rankings, but there is very little chance that she will make it up the yearly system in time to get to the championships, though it is possible (husarova and dokic has 599 pts which isnt' a lot, but then again, its only april).

maccardel - the entry rankings have nothing to do w/ the season ending championship (SEC) rankings. the entry rankings only exist to do seeding and for placement in qualifying draws b/c it would be ridiculous to erase the rankings every year and start anew. usually, it works out that the top 16 players will end up in the season ending championships. currently, there are 3 top 16 (well, 17 b/c im not including tauziat) in the 16 for SEC. anne kremer, 23 in entry, nathalie dechy, 32, and janette husarova, 38. the entry's top 16 players that are NOT in the SEC top 16 are lindsay davenport (injured, has 0 pts. total), meghann shaughnessy (terrible year, 471 pts. total, ranked 26), and elena dementieva (don't have a reason, 592 pts. total, ranked 18, though 7 pts. from being 15, so, its all relative). its shaky at the beginning of the year b/c some players play more at the beginning of the year on hardcourt (like venus), while others like to play some at the beginning and wait for clay (like amelie), so the rankings don't usually start to come into clearing until at least after the clay season, sometimes well into the end of year hardcourt season. that's why they don't coincide. but they will - they almost always do.

Apr 24th, 2002, 02:25 AM
There seems to be some huge misconception about the diiference between ranking points and "race" points. This isn't the ATP, with some asinine MastersSeries-ChampionsRace-NoQualityPoint system. The race points are the best 17 ranking points accumulated for the year, so it is at Championships time, basically the players rankings not counting last years Championships. That's all there is to it.

Apr 24th, 2002, 02:32 AM
lol @ DH :)

sorry if i confused u :wavey:

Apr 24th, 2002, 02:32 AM

Apr 24th, 2002, 04:23 AM
the points that count in the Championship is EVERY SINGLE POINT YOU GET.
Actual rank is best 17.

So if you play 30 Tourns like Jelena Dokic, then points in all those 30 count in the Race to the Champs.