PDA

View Full Version : Roadmap - Your Thoughts So Far?


sammy01
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:38 PM
ok so 4 months into the 'roadmap' what are your thoughts. the roadmap promissed us the best players playing each other more often, has it worked? with 2 of the 4 mandatories down, dubai and charleston, have you seen improvement on last year or previous years.

for me personaly i see no improvement on last year, injuries are still rife, we have had razzano and lisicki in big tournament finals which just dosen't cut it for me. also i think we will have many players break the top 10 this year as it seems easier to plan a schedule to win a lot of matches when not top 10.

the big tournaments have been few and far between with many 'wasted' weeks (im holding out hope the run of big tournaments on red clay will get things going a bit more) but i think this is contributing to top player up and down form, as they are playing so little they don't have chance to get 'on a roll' as it were.

anyway what are your thoughts?

Slutiana
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:41 PM
Lets wait until some other big tournaments come along, although IW and Miami were awful for obvious reasons, but I think it was down to the players more than the map.

mboyle
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:44 PM
I don't think it's any worse. Serena and Venus not playing IW hurt, but I don't blame them obviously. I just don't think there are many good players right now.

sammy01
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:46 PM
i wasn't going to mention quality, but its been crap which i think is also down to the stop startness of the roadmap, players just not playing enough weeks to be grooved.

we're over a 1/3 of the way through, i thought now would be a good time to reflect given the red clay season starts in a week.

bobbynorwich
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:57 PM
Too early to tell, really. Being able to count only the top 16 tourneys will prevent a player from racking up lots of points by playing 22+ a year. Plus it helps those players who were worried about playing too much and getting injured. And limiting the top players from playing the lower tier events creates a kind of 'farm camp' for newcomers, which is good. In concept, it should help the bigger events get the best field, but seems a little clunky. Like all big changes, it will need fine tuning. Give it some time, then decide.

allrounder
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:11 AM
The new pointless Bali event is another one of Larry Scotts many unforced errors as CEO. He should be encouraging the players outside the top 8 to strive to make it into the top 8 and rightfully earn their place at the lucrative proper YEC at Doha by being the best players throughtout the whole season.

As it is he's basically rewarding the second tier players for winning MM tournaments that aren't good enough to be amongst the elite players on the tour with a big paycheque. What will winning this tournament actually mean anyway to the individual? that they're the best player outside of the elite players on the tour? not anything worth being remembered for thats for sure at the end of their careers. The international events are already good enough to be considered stepping stones in a players career as they are. If its supposed to show us who the future stars are what is the point? the real future stars will rise to the top eventually themselves.

Larry must've just got bored one day and decided to fix things that weren't broke.

pwayne
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:12 AM
To me, this is the same as 2008 but the real answer(s) will come during the USO Series.

Dave.
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:16 AM
I never liked the idea of it, and so far the WTA are not getting the big name matchups they were probably hoping for in their finals. The worst thing about Roadmap like Sammy said is the wasted weeks thing. Take February for example, usually there were 4 or 5 straight big tournaments with top players playing against each other, all in between the AO and IW-Miami (that was Tokyo, Paris, Antwerp, Doha, Dubai). This year all we got was Paris & Dubai to last the whole month. Venus ended up going all the way to Acapulco, Zvonareva to Pattaya, Azarenka & Wozniacki to Memphis etc. and the rest just didn't play. Sorry it just doesn't make sense to me. And the thing is, players are still getting injured, quality of tennis has not changed and we are just getting less tennis than before. Then when we finally get to see the top players together again for IW-Miami, most of them get upset early!


However, like any true tennis fan, I just want to see good tennis. I don't care if Lisicki won Charleston instead of a top player, her run this week was so much fun to follow. But I won't bet on her doing it again for a while. The inconsistency in all of the top players is not good for the game, and you have to feel the new scheduling is partly contributing to that.


That all said, this season has still been enjoyable so far with many different names doing well, breakthrough runs/storylines. But it needs to happen at the same time. I hope it all comes together for the RG-Wimbledon month but with so much inconsistency right now you just don't know. The person who wins Stuttgart or Madrid will probably lose 1R of the French for all we know. :o

Volcana
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:18 AM
Not hideous.

The Indian Wells thing is a walking disaster, but you couldn't put off implementing something that would improve the finanacial health of the tour until the Williams Sisters were gone. When your house is burning down, you don't hold off calling the fire department for fear people will find out your lawn has crabgrass.

HOS
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:27 AM
I still think some tournies are in the wrong place in the calender but the concept is good.
Not saying V and S should or shouldn't have played IW, but the fact they didn't in the roadmap didn't help its cause.
Also, for Charleston to get a cut off of 130 or whatever for a Premier I wouldn't have thought would be desirable or helped the Roadmap cause.

Also think the no more than 1 top 10'er for a International event is ?? and I don't really get the get extra $$ and you can have them....but points are still awarded as a internationl? ANd regardless if you are defedning chmap or played there evbery year, if you are ranked below the other Top 10'er you miss out (the Radawanska situ in Pattaya)

sammy01
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:30 AM
I never liked the idea of it, and so far the WTA are not getting the big name matchups they were probably hoping for in their finals. The worst thing about Roadmap like Sammy said is the wasted weeks thing. Take February for example, usually there were 4 or 5 straight big tournaments with top players playing against each other, all in between the AO and IW-Miami (that was Tokyo, Paris, Antwerp, Doha, Dubai). This year all we got was Paris & Dubai to last the whole month. Venus ended up going all the way to Acapulco, Zvonareva to Pattaya, Azarenka & Wozniacki to Memphis etc. and the rest just didn't play. Sorry it just doesn't make sense to me. And the thing is, players are still getting injured, quality of tennis has not changed and we are just getting less tennis than before. Then when we finally get to see the top players together again for IW-Miami, most of them get upset early!


However, like any true tennis fan, I just want to see good tennis. I don't care if Lisicki won Charleston instead of a top player, her run this week was so much fun to follow. But I won't bet on her doing it again for a while. The inconsistency in all of the top players is not good for the game, and you have to feel the new scheduling is partly contributing to that.


That all said, this season has still been enjoyable so far with many different names doing well, breakthrough runs/storylines. But it needs to happen at the same time. I hope it all comes together for the RG-Wimbledon month but with so much inconsistency right now you just don't know. The person who wins Stuttgart or Madrid will probably lose 1R of the French for all we know. :o

:worship: this is exactly how i feel on the roadmap, only you put it so much better, you're annoyingly articulate lol :kiss:

Dave.
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:39 AM
:worship: this is exactly how i feel on the roadmap, only you put it so much better, you're annoyingly articulate lol :kiss:

Give yourself credit, the "wasted weeks" thing was all your idea :worship: :p

Wiggly
Apr 20th, 2009, 02:01 AM
The Roadmap doesn't work because most top players sucks at the moment.
So, instead of having a Jelena vs Venus showdown, the night session of the QFs will be like Llagostera Vives vs Medina Garrigues. On hard. :lol:

RJWCapriati
Apr 20th, 2009, 03:26 AM
It seems all the tournaments have at least 2 to 3 top names now which is good, but i just don't like the limit to the number of top players per tournament. I think there should be a minimum of top players but no maximum.

adner
Apr 20th, 2009, 05:16 AM
By the way, Charleston is just a Premier tournament, not mandatory at all, it just has raised prize money(and not points).

DutchieGirl
Apr 20th, 2009, 11:32 AM
Lots of things I still don't like about it, some have been mentioned above already. Let's see how the rest of the year turns out.

bad_angel_109
Apr 20th, 2009, 11:34 AM
its ok, i guess :shrug: bit confusing and boring at times

sammy01
Apr 20th, 2009, 11:37 AM
By the way, Charleston is just a Premier tournament, not mandatory at all, it just has raised prize money(and not points).

no one said charleston was a mandatory, i said we've had 2 of the 4 mandatories (IW miami), plus dubai and charleston to of the 1million events, so thats surely enough 'big' tournaments to have 1st impressions of the roadmap.

Matt01
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:02 PM
The worst thing about Roadmap like Sammy said is the wasted weeks thing. Take February for example, usually there were 4 or 5 straight big tournaments with top players playing against each other, all in between the AO and IW-Miami (that was Tokyo, Paris, Antwerp, Doha, Dubai).


4-5 big tournaments in one month was simply too many. I think it is good that the number of big tournaments was reduced. It was a bit stupid though then to have one indoor tourney in Europe and the next week one outdoor tourney in Asia.

Overall I think the Roadmap has improved some things but I still have some problems with it. It still needs better fine-tuning.

sammy01
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:09 PM
4-5 big tournaments in one month was simply too many. I think it is good that the number of big tournaments was reduced. It was a bit stupid though then to have one indoor tourney in Europe and the next week one outdoor tourney in Asia.

Overall I think the Roadmap has improved some things but I still have some problems with it. It still needs better fine-tuning.

really, cus i remember those febuary weeks last year as great, dubai was one of the best tournaments of the year, doha was very windy but had some very tight matches, paris had chak winning so that was brilliant, henin pleased her home fans in antwerp (though the tennis was rank), seemed like a good month to me. this year we had paris where serena gave a walkover in the semis, and momo took advantage of players not playing well. then dubai fell apart and the top players crashed and burned leaving razzano in the final. so the top players played less this year in febuary compared to last year, but sucked harder than last year.

adner
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:42 PM
no one said charleston was a mandatory, i said we've had 2 of the 4 mandatories (IW miami), plus dubai and charleston to of the 1million events, so thats surely enough 'big' tournaments to have 1st impressions of the roadmap.

Dubai is a higher tier(Premier 5) than Charleston.

Matt01
Apr 20th, 2009, 12:49 PM
really, cus i remember those febuary weeks last year as great, dubai was one of the best tournaments of the year, doha was very windy but had some very tight matches, paris had chak winning so that was brilliant, henin pleased her home fans in antwerp (though the tennis was rank), seemed like a good month to me. this year we had paris where serena gave a walkover in the semis, and momo took advantage of players not playing well. then dubai fell apart and the top players crashed and burned leaving razzano in the final. so the top players played less this year in febuary compared to last year, but sucked harder than last year.


Sorry but I have to respectfully disagree with the bolded part :p

It is only logical that the players played less this year in February, since they all had to play IW and Miami. In the last few years lots of the top players either skipped IW or Miami. And again, it is good that the players have some breaks in between the big tournaments because in the long run, it could lead to avoiding injuries and lead to seeing the top players play against each other more often on the "big stages".

And this February was very enjoyable to me anyway since Momo won in Paris and Razzano reached the final in Dubai :angel:

Dave.
Apr 20th, 2009, 03:38 PM
Actually 2008 Feb perhaps is not the best example (apart from Dubai, and Chak winning a tourney of course), but all the years before that were usually great that time of year. This year's February was surely the worst though.

Matt01, the players played less in February..and still sucked for IW-Miami. They only played less because they had to, normally alot of players committed to at least 2-3 tourneys in February. I know some top players have skipped IW in recent years, but they still had enough for it to be a legitimate tier 1.

The biggest problem I always had with the roadmap is the players can no longer choose their events. Dementieva had not played IW since 2006, she didn't want to go there this year, she loses 2R. All the players are different, the tour can't expect everyone to play well on the same schedule. Some prefer to have 4-5 straight weeks on tour, others prefer bigger breaks.

Direwolf
Apr 21st, 2009, 09:53 AM
it has been great!

doujyr
Apr 21st, 2009, 10:22 AM
Very patchy, and limting the smaller tournaments to 1 big name tends to hand the one big name who bothers to show up a title on a plate.

I'm still utterly baffled by the end of season timings. YEC straight after Moscow? Bali and Fed Cup after the YEC? This may have made fine logistical sense to some management consultant sat at his little desk making his little plans, but it makes no sense for the sport. The YEC should be the last event of the year, with the final being the ultimate showdown.

sammy01
Apr 21st, 2009, 11:36 AM
i agree hence the name 'year END championship' lol

goldenlox
Apr 21st, 2009, 01:31 PM
Players should be allowed more choices in their scheduling
If the money and points are there, you'll get a good field.
Some players like a certain city or want a break at a certain time, and the tour should allow for that

Langers
Apr 21st, 2009, 03:35 PM
The ATP tour is in great shape, I have enjoyed it probably more than any other recent year.

The WTA though, it's in a baaaad way.

Lunaris
Apr 24th, 2009, 11:30 AM
Can someone explain what is this roadmap? The only changes for this season I have noticed are 3 more mandatory tournaments, slightly altered ranking system and "premium" tournaments (whathever that means). Is that it?

sammy01
Apr 24th, 2009, 12:19 PM
Can someone explain what is this roadmap? The only changes for this season I have noticed are 3 more mandatory tournaments, slightly altered ranking system and "premium" tournaments (whathever that means). Is that it?

basicaly the top 10's schedule is planned out for them as they have to play the mandatory's, 4 of the 5 premier events (and the one they skip has to be played the next season) at least 2 of 700k tournaments 1 in europe, 1 in america and can only play 2 premium events 1 in either half of the season.

this is supposed to almost force the top 10 players to play each other more often as they can't decide a schedule to different from others in the top 10. only so far its fallen flat on its face, as the top players are playing so few tournaments most turn up not knowing what form they are going to bring and get upset early.

the tour is basicaly trying to get the top 10 to play 16 to 18 of the same tournaments each year, which dosen't help players who love to play a busy schedule, neither does it help forcing top players to play in tournaments/cities they don't want to, hence elena dementieva losing 1st match at IW and saying she didn't want to be there.

Lunaris
Apr 24th, 2009, 12:52 PM
Thanks.
Another question. What's the difference between top 10 and non-top 10 players' respective schedules? To what extent can a player ranked 11-30 (exempt list 11-30) plan her own schedule?

sammy01
Apr 24th, 2009, 01:01 PM
Thanks.
Another question. What's the difference between top 10 and non-top 10 players' respective schedules? To what extent can a player ranked 11-30 (exempt list 11-30) plan her own schedule?

11-30 can do as they please, the 4 mandatory's are the only thing they have to play, hence wozniacki whoring herself out to any premium event that will pay a bonus to her and raking up a lot of points doing so.

Sean.
Apr 24th, 2009, 01:22 PM
It's hard to say becuase there have been some injuries and so many slumping players, but I still quite like it however.

Though am afraid that it'll lead to burn outs toward the end of the year, we have already seen Caro & Lena struggline from over playing!

Lunaris
Apr 24th, 2009, 01:30 PM
Top 10 shouldn't be treated differently due to many reasons, but the whole idea is okay. Afterall we want as many matches between top players as possible. The fact that they don't deliver quality performances and whine when they lose is a different matter.
Now that I think about it there was a similar thread about this a couple of months ago.

DOUBLEFIST
Apr 24th, 2009, 06:51 PM
What road map? :rolleyes:

sammy01
Apr 24th, 2009, 06:58 PM
you know larry's road map to bankrupting and destroying the WTA lol, oh how we miss him!

bobbynorwich
Apr 24th, 2009, 09:10 PM
The mission of the roadmap as approved by the WTA Board is very ambitious, including:
concentrate the best players at the biggest tourneys, allowing for increased prize money
distribute best players evenly at premier (tier 1) events, with revenue sharing
prevent players from racking up points just by entering every tourney possible
decrease the number of required tourneys and shorten the season
opening up the lower level tourneys (international/tier 2) for upcoming and lesser ranked playersThose are good goals, but it'd be surprising if all these changes happen without some glitches. The problem of different amounts of prize money depending on how many top players enter a tourney is one. Loss of flexibility for the top 10 is another. However, the WTA acknowledges the need for fine-tuning:WTA president Stacey Allaster believes some teething troubles are inevitable because of the scope of the restructuring. "This is the most comprehensive set of reforms in the tour's history," she said. "The principles of the Roadmap are well understood. Now we're into the procedures -- the understanding of exactly how it will work. http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/columns/story?columnist=kamakshi_tandon&id=3669584

Any problems will be obvious after a few years and can be remedied during the WTA's annual planned reviews. Time will tell.

sammy01
Apr 24th, 2009, 09:17 PM
my biggest problem with it is dropping popular, loved, well attended, supported by players tournaments for ones in the middle east that can throw bucketloads of money at tennis now but it isn't building tennis up in these parts. the day dubai, doha ect decide to not renew contracts the WTA will be stuffed, because tournaments that were long standing and would survive through being popular with crowds are being shunted. san diego, AI, the indoor season tournaments were mainstays on the tour that attracted top players and had been on the calender years, i can see no justification for losing these tournaments for ones that offer a shitload of money but no one watching, it will lead to the bottom falling out of womens tennis

Craig.
Apr 24th, 2009, 09:19 PM
Umm, useless? :shrug:

I've barely seen any changes.

bobbynorwich
Apr 24th, 2009, 09:23 PM
my biggest problem with it is dropping popular, loved, well attended, supported by players tournaments for ones in the middle east that can throw bucketloads of money at tennis now but it isn't building tennis up in these parts. the day dubai, doha ect decide to not renew contracts the WTA will be stuffed, because tournaments that were long standing and would survive through being popular with crowds are being shunted. san diego, AI, the indoor season tournaments were mainstays on the tour that attracted top players and had been on the calender years, i can see no justification for losing these tournaments for ones that offer a shitload of money but no one watching, it will lead to the bottom falling out of womens tennis

Good point about some locales "over buying" a tourney when the fan base isn't there. It may be related to the WTA's goal of growing women's tennis in newer, emerging markets like Asia and the Middle East. Too bad it's at the expense of traditional sites though.

bad_angel_109
May 15th, 2009, 10:09 AM
its getting crappier and crappier :(

sammy01
May 15th, 2009, 12:49 PM
well a lot were saying it was to early to judge when i made this, but i could see the early signs that it just wasn't working. these last few weeks have shown the women can play good tennis but they do it when and where they want or you get a tournament fall apart like madrid.

Golovinjured.
May 15th, 2009, 12:58 PM
It's pretty shit.

sakya23
May 15th, 2009, 01:16 PM
i like it, we just need to downgrade Warsaw

FFS
May 15th, 2009, 01:22 PM
Too many players injuried played first match just to not be fined.
And some other players had to play qualy when the could access to main draw.
Maybe is better a low-ranked player who give her best than a top player that can play her tennis.

And in last weeks almost all top 10 players are complening, maybe this is a clear sign this calendar2009 isn't such a great idea

bad_angel_109
May 16th, 2009, 10:07 AM
^ well said. this "roadmap" is forcing the top ranked players to play at mandatory tournaments w/o taking into consideration if they're injured or just want to take a week off to recover and recuperate, its having a pronoun affect on the players and ultimately the quality of the tour :(

TennisViewer531
May 16th, 2009, 10:30 AM
The Roadmap is doing good so far. We get occasional complaints from top players but they're not the only players on tour. We should consider the lower-ranked players who are not complaining at all...

bad_angel_109
May 16th, 2009, 10:31 AM
^ yeah coz the lower-ranked players are losing in the first or 2nd rounds :sobbing:

-Sonic-
May 16th, 2009, 11:30 AM
I don't think its as bad as some people would make out. People are still in the defiance/resistance phases of their adaptation to change.

There ARE some good points. I think the fact there are now equals to IW and Miami on other surfaces and in other countries is great. It wasn't fair that N American Hardcourts could make up 50% of someone's ranking - all being Tier 2 upwards, plus some indoor Tier 3's to round it out.

I believe in a few years when younger players are used to these rules, when its what they have grown up with or what they are used to, it'll be fine. There'll be far less moaning and dare I say, less injuries because people will evolve the way they train and adapt it to their schedule - they'll have more structure to work with year on year.

I'm not sure if I agree with this personally - but one could argue that making top players all turn up at the same events but non-top players getting through to the later rounds just actually shows how these top players aren't that good :o Could it be that when players could choose where they wanted, they picked weaker events so that they could pick up some points and get their rankings up? If we made the same 32 people play each other 18 times a year, then there'd be a much clearer ranking for people to see for those 32 people in terms of who is actually the best. Tournaments with x and y missing, then next week z and k missing then the week after x and z not playing, is one way of creating a skewed ranking system.

Now - there are many bad points that posters have mentioned previously so I won't bother, so don't quote me and attack to death as I agree with them also. There are things I don't understand with the rules that I may ask someone about later on and there are clear bad choices within the calender, the ranking points allocation and other rules, but on the whole I can see why it was done, and a sensible player should be able to adapt with these changes without too much hassle.

Sapphisto
May 16th, 2009, 11:32 AM
ok so 4 months into the 'roadmap' what are your thoughts. the roadmap promissed us the best players playing each other more often, has it worked? with 2 of the 4 mandatories down, dubai and charleston, have you seen improvement on last year or previous years.

for me personaly i see no improvement on last year, injuries are still rife, we have had razzano and lisicki in big tournament finals which just dosen't cut it for me. also i think we will have many players break the top 10 this year as it seems easier to plan a schedule to win a lot of matches when not top 10.

the big tournaments have been few and far between with many 'wasted' weeks (im holding out hope the run of big tournaments on red clay will get things going a bit more) but i think this is contributing to top player up and down form, as they are playing so little they don't have chance to get 'on a roll' as it were.

anyway what are your thoughts?

Taking the minimalist approach: It sucks.

FFS
May 16th, 2009, 12:33 PM
madrid, WTA mandatory event, first semifinal at 11.00 second semifinal at 13.00
I wonder how many spectators were watching the first match. A semifinal, a repeat again, of mandotory event.
If wta is interested only to money ok, but is not in this way you can promote women tennis.

VishaalMaria
May 16th, 2009, 12:56 PM
I really havent seen much difference in last years and this years quality of play.

It's forcing the top players to play more in these premiere events? In Madrid, Ana withdrew, Serena, Venus, Kuznetsova lost early, and Jelena Jankovic lost in the QF's. The only top player left standing is Dinara, and she'll play Caroline in the final tomorrow. Hardly a marquee match up

How exactly does it work then?

Matt01
May 16th, 2009, 01:15 PM
madrid, WTA mandatory event, first semifinal at 11.00 second semifinal at 13.00
I wonder how many spectators were watching the first match. A semifinal, a repeat again, of mandotory event.
If wta is interested only to money ok, but is not in this way you can promote women tennis.


I agree.

sammy01
May 16th, 2009, 01:21 PM
i agree the WTA has totaly folded there in letting the ATP have their 2 semis in the afternoon/evening, with the women thrown on early like they were trying to get them over with. not good.

-Sonic-
May 16th, 2009, 01:38 PM
I love the WTA, but you'd need to pull 15 years worth of WTA star power together to Rival the Nadal/Federer/Djokovic combo. Had Murray won last nite it'd be impossible. Plus the Men have 4 mandatory GS and 1000 events and they all manage to turn up to them all, maybe missing 1 or 2 a year max - but they take their 0 and get on with it.

Would have needed Graf, Seles, Serena and Hingis/Venus/Maria in the final 4.

Please don't throw your shoes at me for thinking that.

sammy01
May 16th, 2009, 01:44 PM
I love the WTA, but you'd need to pull 15 years worth of WTA star power together to Rival the Nadal/Federer/Djokovic combo. Had Murray won last nite it'd be impossible.

Would have needed Graf, Seles, Serena and Hingis/Venus/Maria in the final 4.

Please don't throw your shoes at me for thinking that.

im not saying the womens semis were anywhere near as star studded, but if you had womens semi, then mens, then women, then mens, at least you would have some chance of getting people to watch the womens. the way it is now people can just turn up at 3pm and watch the 2 mens semis and totaly miss the womens, the WTA has to be smarter than to let that happen, i mean you never know some of them that might have watched a womens semi had they been mixed in with the mens may have enjoyed it and become a fan.

-Sonic-
May 16th, 2009, 01:47 PM
ok :p

wally1
May 16th, 2009, 02:16 PM
im not saying the womens semis were anywhere near as star studded, but if you had womens semi, then mens, then women, then mens, at least you would have some chance of getting people to watch the womens. the way it is now people can just turn up at 3pm and watch the 2 mens semis and totaly miss the womens, the WTA has to be smarter than to let that happen, i mean you never know some of them that might have watched a womens semi had they been mixed in with the mens may have enjoyed it and become a fan.I've never understood why the WTA think having more mixed events is good for the women's game. The women just get treated as a sideshow.

TheBoiledEgg
May 16th, 2009, 06:10 PM
now i think everyone knows why the women were on 1st

Djerk vs Mowgli been playing for nearly 4 hrs :o

bad_angel_109
May 22nd, 2009, 02:32 PM
I really havent seen much difference in last years and this years quality of play.

It's forcing the top players to play more in these premiere events? In Madrid, Ana withdrew, Serena, Venus, Kuznetsova lost early, and Jelena Jankovic lost in the QF's. The only top player left standing is Dinara, and she'll play Caroline in the final tomorrow. Hardly a marquee match up

How exactly does it work then?i'd like to know the answer to that as well :confused:

Tamus
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:17 PM
Once again a "premier" tournament where the top seeds flameout early - top 6 seeds in Tokyo fail to win a match. Maybe if the players were allowed to play when and where they wanted we would see better quality matches. What's the point of having "elite" fields when all the top players are gone by the 3rd round anyway. The players don't seem committed to this roadmap and are just going through the motions.

Steffica Greles
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:21 PM
I think we need a tidal wave, or a typhoon, or something dramatic, to sweep away the vast majority of these current imbeciles wielding tennis rackets, and then maybe some green shoots will appear.

A Road Map is neither here nor there.

sammy01
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:33 PM
i think i've come to that conclusion. we cant really even judge the roadmap as the top players are so frigging inconsistent. does it work, who knows, as players cant play well 2 tournaments in a row.

i think it has slightly got the top players playing more, but heck when half their tournaments are 1st and 2nd round loses there not actually playing anymore matches than previous years.

its not the roadmap that is getting a big fat 'F' right now, its the top women.

Steffica Greles
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:38 PM
Hehe.

I used to love that scene in Mary Poppins, when all those grim-looking candidates to be nanny, queued in a long line at the front door, were suddenly blown away by a vast gust of wind, and as soon as things had settled down again, Mary Poppins arrived on her umbrella - 'practically perfect in every way'.

I think something similar needs to happen to women's tennis.

The Dawntreader
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:41 PM
It's been a bad combination. The women have been way off any kind of real standard, and the roadmap is absurd. Madrid for example was the biggest abhoration.

Steffica Greles
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QriQZddTGw&feature=related wind to 1:50

LOL!! It's what's needed.

sammy01
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:47 PM
i was thinking maybe some great new player would come through and raise the bar (well it cant get much lower), i thought maybe robson but then she seems incapable of playing a match with less than 10+ df's and seems like an ivanovic 2.0.

im actually dreading the YEC, 8 players all playing crap, there could be some record UE counts, still at least its in doha so there will be no one in the stands to see it.

Steffica Greles
Sep 29th, 2009, 04:53 PM
Imagine....Kuznetsova....Jankovic....Safina....the n all the fat girls just being swept away, over the horizon.

Tamus
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:05 PM
It's been a bad combination. The women have been way off any kind of real standard, and the roadmap is absurd. Madrid for example was the biggest abhoration.

Agree totally. Obviously the top players are really weak at the moment, but I'm also seeing a lot of uninspired tennis in these mandatory/premier 5 events.

StephenUK
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:07 PM
It's been a bad combination. The women have been way off any kind of real standard, and the roadmap is absurd. Madrid for example was the biggest abhoration.

I agree with you although I think Warsaw was the biggest joke.

The roadmap seems to have been a great idea in theory but it seems to have virtually wrecked the tour. Making all the top players play against each other, not just at the slams and Miami, but also at a number of other events has backfired big style. Either players try to win the events and burn out eg Dementieva who is still complaining about being tired from the US Open series or they just don't bother winning them and concentrate on the slams eg the Williams sisters, Clijsters. The result has been a total dissonance between the results on the tour and the slams, unparallelled in over 30 years of the women's tour, whereby the slam winners only hold one other WTA title between them.

The roadmap (unfortunate name, given its association with doomed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks)needs a total overhaul for 2010 because the women's game is in serious crisis. Serena was openly rebelling against it already in the spring. I think the restrictions will have to be eased and the tour changed back to more like it was, because this is not working at all.

I always thought there was something coincidental about the Justine Henin retirement and the launch of the roadmap and it is interesting that she comes back now, at a time when Serena Williams and Kim Clijsters have shown how to win slams by virtually ignoring it. My guess is that she will join their camp if it continues into 2010, but this will not help the ailing WTA Tour, because if the main stars don't commit to the tournaments outside the slams, why should the public?

C. Drone
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:08 PM
Once again a "premier" tournament where the top seeds flameout early - top 6 seeds in Tokyo fail to win a match. Maybe if the players were allowed to play when and where they wanted we would see better quality matches. What's the point of having "elite" fields when all the top players are gone by the 3rd round anyway. The players don't seem committed to this roadmap and are just going through the motions.

they let them.
Dementieva played 6 event in row in Jan-Febr, and then did nothing till Wimbledon. Safina played 4 clay final and then she played MM torunament before and after Wimbledon. and they whining about exhaustion? :lol:
from Januar to September 90% of tournaments date and place is the same like previous years. They played the same events, the same number of tournaments. Yeah, they demolish they fall indoor season and some Tier-II tournament, because players complained playing in middle/late november... :tape:

Every top10 player could drop 1 Premier5 tournament each year. Which one dropped Tokyo? NO ONE. (besides Dementieva, who dropped Rome.) They went Tokyo and sucked.

StephenUK
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:10 PM
i was thinking maybe some great new player would come through and raise the bar (well it cant get much lower), i thought maybe robson but then she seems incapable of playing a match with less than 10+ df's and seems like an ivanovic 2.0.

im actually dreading the YEC, 8 players all playing crap, there could be some record UE counts, still at least its in doha so there will be no one in the stands to see it.

Maybe they should move it to North Korea, if it's going to be that bad!! :lol:

sammy01
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:23 PM
I agree with you although I think Warsaw was the biggest joke.

The roadmap seems to have been a great idea in theory but it seems to have virtually wrecked the tour. Making all the top players play against each other, not just at the slams and Miami, but also at a number of other events has backfired big style. Either players try to win the events and burn out eg Dementieva who is still complaining about being tired from the US Open series or they just don't bother winning them and concentrate on the slams eg the Williams sisters, Clijsters. The result has been a total dissonance between the results on the tour and the slams, unparallelled in over 30 years of the women's tour, whereby the slam winners only hold one other WTA title between them.

The roadmap (unfortunate name, given its association with doomed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks)needs a total overhaul for 2010 because the women's game is in serious crisis. Serena was openly rebelling against it already in the spring. I think the restrictions will have to be eased and the tour changed back to more like it was, because this is not working at all.

I always thought there was something coincidental about the Justine Henin retirement and the launch of the roadmap and it is interesting that she comes back now, at a time when Serena Williams and Kim Clijsters have shown how to win slams by virtually ignoring it. My guess is that she will join their camp if it continues into 2010, but this will not help the ailing WTA Tour, because if the main stars don't commit to the tournaments outside the slams, why should the public?

i was wondering about henin and what her schedule will be when she comes back. she sure as hell isn't going to be playing 19 or 20 tournaments, 15 at most and they will be where she wants to play.

if she serena and kim all decide they will make their own schedule and take any fines the WTA throw at them they could very well end the road map, as these 3 are/will be the tours stars.

there have been so many complete 'fail' tournaments this year, warsaw, madrid, a couple of the us open series ones, dubai (venus aside), IW and now tokyo. at the end of the day i'd rather have a less stellar entry list anywhere and have those players committed and wanting to win the title, than have all the top players at a tournament with half of them not even trying.

Protoss
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:29 PM
they let them.
Dementieva played 6 event in row in Jan-Febr, and then did nothing till Wimbledon. Safina played 4 clay final and then she played MM torunament before and after Wimbledon. and they whining about exhaustion? :lol:
from Januar to September 90% of tournaments date and place is the same like previous years. They played the same events, the same number of tournaments. Yeah, they demolish they fall indoor season and some Tier-II tournament, because players complained playing in middle/late november... :tape:

Every top10 player could drop 1 Premier5 tournament each year. Which one dropped Tokyo? NO ONE. (besides Dementieva, who dropped Rome.) They went Tokyo and sucked.
Isn't there bonus money for playing all the Premier5 tournaments?

Tamus
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:37 PM
they let them.
Dementieva played 6 event in row in Jan-Febr, and then did nothing till Wimbledon. Safina played 4 clay final and then she played MM torunament before and after Wimbledon. and they whining about exhaustion? :lol:
from Januar to September 90% of tournaments date and place is the same like previous years. They played the same events, the same number of tournaments. Yeah, they demolish they fall indoor season and some Tier-II tournament, because players complained playing in middle/late november... :tape:

Every top10 player could drop 1 Premier5 tournament each year. Which one dropped Tokyo? NO ONE. (besides Dementieva, who dropped Rome.) They went Tokyo and sucked.

In past years you would have a hard time finding one top player playing in 8 of 9 Tier 1 events in a year; now they all do it, because they have to. On the surface it may look great w/ 9 tournaments outside of the slams having full player fields, but it's just a sham. One gets the feeling that the top players really don't want to be at these events, and wouldn't be there if given the choice. Also, the schedule is so unbalanced now with back-to-back top tournaments this hurts the quality of play even more. The second-tier tournaments suffer as players have to base their schedules around the top events, and top players are restricted in how many lower level events they can enter. So what do we get? Long periods of time with shitty tournaments with no top players playing, and then congested periods with top players struggling with lack of form, motivation, etc. And the roadmap certainly hasn't done much to promote the tour as evidenced by the sparse crowds and dwindling TV coverage at these so-called "premier" events.

Lunaris
Sep 29th, 2009, 05:58 PM
Once again a "premier" tournament where the top seeds flameout early - top 6 seeds in Tokyo fail to win a match. Maybe if the players were allowed to play when and where they wanted we would see better quality matches. What's the point of having "elite" fields when all the top players are gone by the 3rd round anyway. The players don't seem committed to this roadmap and are just going through the motions.
I read somewhere the number of withdrawals had lowered by 36% in comparison to the last season, which is good. On the other hand some players, even though they were present, just didn't perform, like you say. But you can hardly blame the roadmap. US Open is supposed to be a tournament players care about, where they should give their best, and look what happened - the upper half completely fell apart.

Dave.
Sep 29th, 2009, 06:06 PM
i think i've come to that conclusion. we cant really even judge the roadmap as the top players are so frigging inconsistent. does it work, who knows, as players cant play well 2 tournaments in a row.

i think it has slightly got the top players playing more, but heck when half their tournaments are 1st and 2nd round loses there not actually playing anymore matches than previous years.

its not the roadmap that is getting a big fat 'F' right now, its the top women.

To be fair on the players, the roadmap is partly why they aren't playing well on a regular basis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QriQZddTGw&feature=related wind to 1:50

LOL!! It's what's needed.

:lol: Maybe someone should get writing a list for the ideal tennis player and throw it onto the fire. :shrug:

C. Drone
Sep 29th, 2009, 06:14 PM
In past years you would have a hard time finding one top player playing in 8 of 9 Tier 1 events in a year; now they all do it, because they have to. On the surface it may look great w/ 9 tournaments outside of the slams having full player fields, but it's just a sham. One gets the feeling that the top players really don't want to be at these events, and wouldn't be there if given the choice. Also, the schedule is so unbalanced now with back-to-back top tournaments this hurts the quality of play even more. The second-tier tournaments suffer as players have to base their schedules around the top events, and top players are restricted in how many lower level events they can enter. So what do we get? Long periods of time with shitty tournaments with no top players playing, and then congested periods with top players struggling with lack of form, motivation, etc. And the roadmap certainly hasn't done much to promote the tour as evidenced by the sparse crowds and dwindling TV coverage at these so-called "premier" events.

well, then get used to it, or pray hard for another world wide recession. They cried for equal GS prize money for many years. They eventually got it. This year the WTA Tour prize money is bigger then ever. Until the WTA has tournaments to provide this incrased prize money, they will do what they want. Players get used to it too, eventually. No times for crybabies.

C. Drone
Sep 29th, 2009, 06:27 PM
Isn't there bonus money for playing all the Premier5 tournaments?

rulebook:
playing all Premier Mandatory: $100-400k
playing 4 Premier-5: $100-400k
playing all Premier-Mandatory and Premier-5 (4+5): $25-100k
playing 2 Premier-700: $25-100k
depends on ranking on the top10 list.

quite difference playing 4 P5 or playing 5 P5, compared to other bonus payments... :shrug: and a P5 Semifinal prizemoney is like $90k...

TheBoiledEgg
Sep 29th, 2009, 07:45 PM
too much hard courts = death wish

Wiggly
Sep 29th, 2009, 10:18 PM
Dementieva said something like she didn't have enough time to rest after the US Open. She had 3 weeks and a half.

It's not the Roadmap fault if top players are sucking since May.

Matt01
Sep 29th, 2009, 11:22 PM
It's Dementieva's own fault that she played so much in the beginning of the season. Same with Wozniacki who is now saying she is tired.

The good thing about the Roadmap is that the Top Players now cannot play every MM tourney they want (anyone remember Venus in 2007? :tape:) and so have some rest between the bigger tournaments (mostly) but that's about it as far as good things are concerned. And in practice as we've seen this season that the Roadmap sucks. But that's also partially the fault of the players.

Sammm
Sep 29th, 2009, 11:53 PM
I still don't get the road map :confused: do top ten players only have to compete in the 4,5 million events, or are they obligated to compete in all the 2million events as well? From what I understand they have to do both, and I think only the 4,5 million tournies should be obligatory for everyone.

Player's scheduling seems to have been especially weird this year - remember Serena and the whole Marbella thing? Anyone with half a brain should have known that kind of scheduling for Serena was utterly idiotic. Was that self-inflicted or the tour's insistence that she play an international tournament?

There needs to be more flexibility - eg, the Russian players should all be allowed to play Moscow.

The road to Bali looks like epic fail.

Does Lena D have a leg to stand on when she complains about the US open series? Was she forced to play Stanford? Anyhow, she's had three weeks rest since the US open; how much longer does she need to recover?

Sammm
Sep 29th, 2009, 11:53 PM
It's Dementieva's own fault that she played so much in the beginning of the season. Same with Wozniacki who is now saying she is tired.

The good thing about the Roadmap is that the Top Players now cannot play every MM tourney they want (anyone remember Venus in 2007? :tape:) and so have some rest between the bigger tournaments (mostly) but that's about it as far as good things are concerned. And in practice as we've seen this season that the Roadmap sucks. But that's also partially the fault of the players.

of course you pick on Venus ;)

sammy01
Sep 29th, 2009, 11:56 PM
i don't think anyone has a clue whos playing bali lol, that will be a huge fail

Matt01
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:03 AM
of course you pick on Venus ;)


This time I just couldn't resist :angel:


i don't think anyone has a clue whos playing bali lol, that will be a huge fail


I think Shahar Peer is playing since she has just won 2 MM tourneys in a row. Aren't you a fan of her ;)

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:05 AM
It's a big fat failure. So many top seeds falling in the early rounds of Premier (tier 1) events or mandatory events. It makes the Tour like a mess. I wish the Wta learned their lesson for 2011 (2010 is too late I guess).

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:12 AM
It is a great idea in theory, even if there are still some logistical kinks to be ironed out. It's the players playing crap that's stopped it being a success this year, not the calendar or rules themselves.

I will agree though that this Bali thing looks hilariously crap.

sammy01
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:12 AM
This time I just couldn't resist :angel:





I think Shahar Peer is playing since she has just won 2 MM tourneys in a row. Aren't you a fan of her ;)

oh god its going to be MM queens battling for a tier 2 title :tape:

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:18 AM
Player's scheduling seems to have been especially weird this year - remember Serena and the whole Marbella thing? Anyone with half a brain should have known that kind of scheduling for Serena was utterly idiotic. Was that self-inflicted or the tour's insistence that she play an international tournament?



It has to do with the sisters skipping IW. It's a trade-off with the wta. Venus agreed to play Acapulco , Serena played Marbella. Serena played on one leg in Marbella as she was injured and should have rested. She then had to pull out of Charleston as her leg got worse playing Marbella. She then played Rome still injured, and then Madrid still injured. The IW thing + the RM : disaster for SW. As a result she was not 100% ready for RG, which she would have won if it wasn't for the goddamn roadmap and stupid wta officials.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:21 AM
It has to do with the sisters skipping IW. It's a trade-off with the wta. Venus agreed to play Acapulco , Serena played Marbella. Serena played on one leg in Marbella as she was injured and should have rested. She then had to pull out of Charleston as her leg got worse playing Marbella. She then played Rome still injured, and then Madrid still injured. The IW thing + the RM : disaster for SW. As a result she was not 100% ready for RG, which she would have won if it wasn't for the goddamn roadmap and stupid wta officials.

You're seriously suggesting that Serena would have won the French Open (a surface she is far from comofortable on at the best of times) if she hadn't played for a full two months beforehand?

sammy01
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:24 AM
i think i've come to the conclusion you just don't tell women what to do lol.

seriously i know mandatory tournaments work with the ATP but i think the women need more freedom, as we have seen with kim and henin they are more fragile and need to do things their own way, which can include walking away from tennis for a couple of years.

if i were the WTA right now i would suggest the only thing to force the players to do is play at least 15 tournaments a year if injury free. what tournaments these are are totally upto the players.

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:30 AM
You're seriously suggesting that Serena would have won the French Open (a surface she is far from comofortable on at the best of times) if she hadn't played for a full two months beforehand?

Yes of course. She almost defeated Kuzny (the eventual winner) in the quarters. She would have trashed Safina in the final because, well, you know...

Sammm
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:34 AM
It has to do with the sisters skipping IW. It's a trade-off with the wta. Venus agreed to play Acapulco , Serena played Marbella. Serena played on one leg in Marbella as she was injured and should have rested. She then had to pull out of Charleston as her leg got worse playing Marbella. She then played Rome still injured, and then Madrid still injured. The IW thing + the RM : disaster for SW. As a result she was not 100% ready for RG, which she would have won if it wasn't for the goddamn roadmap and stupid wta officials.

Thanks :wavey: I knew it was some ridiculously convoluted reason like that.

You're seriously suggesting that Serena would have won the French Open (a surface she is far from comofortable on at the best of times) if she hadn't played for a full two months beforehand?

Serena was hardly far from beating Sveta, was she? :shrug: and don't tell me she would have lost to Stosur in a grand slam semi. A bit more practice on red clay tournaments Serena really wanted to play might have given her the edge against Kuzzy. Who knows. A Safina vs Serena final would have been a hell of a lot more exciting too.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:36 AM
Thanks :wavey: I knew it was some ridiculously convoluted reason like that.



Serena was hardly far from beating Sveta, was she? :shrug: and don't tell me she would have lost to Stosur in a grand slam semi. A bit more practice on red clay tournaments Serena really wanted to play might have given her the edge against Kuzzy. Who knows. A Safina vs Serena final would have been a hell of a lot more exciting too.

She also wasn't that far from losing to Zakopalova in the first round, and I'm pretty sure that she would've lost that match had she not played any tournaments between Miami and the FO. Three losses is better preparation for a Grand Slam than no matches at all.

sammy01
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:37 AM
if's buts and maybes. i mean IF chak wasn't crap she would be great :sad: :tape:


p.s sorry chak love you really, you still have the greatest ponytail on tour!

Sammm
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:38 AM
She also wasn't that far from losing to Zakopalova in the first round, and I'm pretty sure that she would've lost that match had she not played any tournaments between Miami and the FO. Three losses is better preparation for a Grand Slam than no matches at all.

My point is that if she had not had to play Marbella her knee (??) would have recovered and she might have approached Rome/ Madrid with a little more gusto.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:40 AM
My point is that if she had not had to play Marbella her knee (??) would have recovered and she might have approached Rome/ Madrid with a little more gusto.

OK, but the other poster was suggesting that Serena would have won the FO had she not played at all between Miami and the FO. In any case, Serena playing Marbella is not directly due to the Roadmap... if she had not broken the Roadmap's rules by skipping IW, she would not have had to play it.

Sammm
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:41 AM
if's buts and maybes. i mean IF chak wasn't crap she would be great :sad: :tape:


p.s sorry chak love you really, you still have the greatest ponytail on tour!

Well, we are discussing the repercussion the roadmap has had on the tour and hypothesizing what it might have looked like had the roadmap not been in place. I don't see that discussion as irrelevant :shrug:


Chak :explode: :hug:

Sammm
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:44 AM
OK, but the other poster was suggesting that Serena would have won the FO had she not played at all between Miami and the FO. In any case, Serena playing Marbella is not directly due to the Roadmap... if she had not broken the Roadmap's rules by skipping IW, she would not have had to play it.

I think you contradict yourself here.

Installing a roadmap which will attempt force two of the tour's biggest stars to play a tournament where they were booed and where they felt they were victims of racial slurs, and then sending them to MM tournaments in the far corners of the globe, hardly seems intelligent.

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:47 AM
Whatever you all say...Serena doesn't need preperation to win a GS, she needs to be injured free. But the stupid new rules got in the way.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:47 AM
I think you contradict yourself here.

Installing a roadmap which will attempt force two of the tour's biggest stars to place a tournament where they were booed and where they felt they victims of racial slurs, and then sending them to MM tournaments in the far corners of the globe, hardly seems intelligent.

Whether or not the sisters are justified in skipping IW is neither here nor there. The point is that the Roadmap itself did NOT dictate that Serena had to play Marbella, so it cannot be blamed for her injury problems.

Craig.
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:49 AM
This time I just couldn't resist :angel:





I think Shahar Peer is playing since she has just won 2 MM tourneys in a row. Aren't you a fan of her ;)

When can you ever? :tape:

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:50 AM
Whatever you all say...Serena doesn't need preperation to win a GS, she needs to be injured free. But the stupid new rules got in the way.

Has Serena ever won a Grand Slam having not played for a full two months beforehand (excluding any AO victories where she obviously wouldn't have played over the off-season)? I don't think so. It's especially true for the French, where Serena simply would need a fantastic clay-court lead-up to win there. To suggest she could've skipped the entire clay-court swing and end up winning the FO is laughable when she's only won it once before.

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 12:59 AM
Whether or not the sisters are justified in skipping IW is neither here nor there. The point is that the Roadmap itself did NOT dictate that Serena had to play Marbella, so it cannot be blamed for her injury problems.

Yes it does. Do yo think Serena is stupid ? Would she agree to play a shitty tourney like Marbella the week after she injured herself in normal times ? Of course not.

Sammm
Sep 30th, 2009, 01:03 AM
Yes it does. Do yo think Serena is stupid ? Would she agree to play a shitty tourney like Marbella the week after she injured herself in normal times ? Of course not.

Exactly.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 01:14 AM
Yes it does. Do yo think Serena is stupid ? Would she agree to play a shitty tourney like Marbella the week after she injured herself in normal times ? Of course not.

Sorry, but that's ridiculous logic. Like I acknowledged, yes the Roadmap indirectly forced Serena to play in Marbella, due to the fact she'd skipped IW. But had she followed the Roadmap's rules, she would NOT have had to play Marbella. Yes, she may be justified in not playing IW, but that doesn't change the fact that the Roadmap's structure itself can not be blamed for forcing Serena to play in Marbella.

LightWarrior
Sep 30th, 2009, 01:14 AM
Has Serena ever won a Grand Slam having not played for a full two months beforehand (excluding any AO victories where she obviously wouldn't have played over the off-season)? I don't think so. It's especially true for the French, where Serena simply would need a fantastic clay-court lead-up to win there. To suggest she could've skipped the entire clay-court swing and end up winning the FO is laughable when she's only won it once before.

Who said not playing 2 months before RG ? Just wait til the leg heal 100%. She probably would have played Madrid, totally healed after Miami in normal times.
Your point is irrelevant anyway. Venus doesn't need to play warmup grass tournaments before Wimbledon to win it 5 times. Champions are champions.

dsanders06
Sep 30th, 2009, 01:17 AM
Who said not playing 2 months before RG ? Just wait til the leg heal 100%. She probably would have played Madrid, totally healed after Miami in normal times.
Your point is irrelevant anyway. Venus doesn't need to play warmup grass tournaments before Wimbledon to win it 5 times. Champions are champions.

Wimbledon is Wimbledon. There are very few warm-up tournaments for that. Someone who just plays Eastbourne or Birmingham doesn't really have much of an advantage over someone like the Williamses who play no warm-ups. Whereas players have weeks to get grooved on clay before the French Open. If it's so easy for Serena to win the FO, why has she only done it once?

sammy01
Sep 30th, 2009, 09:40 AM
Well, we are discussing the repercussion the roadmap has had on the tour and hypothesizing what it might have looked like had the roadmap not been in place. I don't see that discussion as irrelevant :shrug:


Chak :explode: :hug:

incase you hadn't noticed i started the thread, so i knew what was being discussed lol

Matt01
Sep 30th, 2009, 10:45 AM
Yes it does. Do yo think Serena is stupid ? Would she agree to play a shitty tourney like Marbella the week after she injured herself in normal times ? Of course not.


The reason why Serena played Marbella was $$$ and nothing else.