[Cooper96]

Originally Posted by somethingkinda

You are so ill informed. You do realize that New Haven's facilities are among one of the largest in the world? Take a crowd of people and put them in a much larger setting and of course the capacity will look unfilled. It's not rocket science.

This. I go to New Haven every year and that stadium is huge. Plus, in that video you can barely see the top level of seats, which are normally much more crowded than the lower level. I can tell you that at this match my section in the top level had single digit empty seats. Plus there is always a band playing outside the stadium in between the smaller courts there and some people just sit and watch the band. Still money being made for the WTA.

[babsi]

Originally Posted by SAISAI-GOAT

having a tournament in the week after AO is not bad ... Tokyo used to be week after AO and it had players like Hingis, Sharapova, Seles all the time

obviously the problem is just w/ Paris

Those players that you listed played because of their sponsors. All big name Yonex players played Tokyo every year. And Canon was a big reason Maria played.

The WTA has moved Paris to one of the worse weeks in the calendar. Top players do not like to play a week after a Grand Slam. No player that has done well in Australia wants to take a 24 hour flight to a city in a totally different climate and surface to play a Premier level event.

The WTA knows all of this and this is why it was put in this week. It is obvious the WTA wants Paris to go, probably so they can give the licence to another Asian tournament.

[dragonflies]

Originally Posted by SAISAI-GOAT

having a tournament in the week after AO is not bad ... Tokyo used to be week after AO and it had players like Hingis, Sharapova, Seles all the time

obviously the problem is just w/ Paris

The circumstance has changed . In the past there were less pre AO tournaments comparing to now. Early 00s top players competed mainly in Sydney. Gold Coast( was a Tier 3) and Auckland ( was a Tier 4), mostly were for lower ranked players. Now we have Brisbane, Sydney, Hobart, Auckland, Shenzen and most top players took part in 2, 3 events. Plus Hopman cup and exhibition in Hongkong and Thailand that interested some top players.




Also, the competition is a lot more brutal now. A lot of players out there hitting a lot bigger, harder, running faster. Early rounds are not as easy comparing to 10 years ago and take more tolls out of top players. Therefore, having a Premier right after a Slam is not a good idea now.

[Xepher]

Paris should be moved to post USO.

[babsi]

Originally Posted by dragonflies

The circumstance has changed . In the past there were less pre AO tournaments comparing to now. Early 00s top players competed mainly in Sydney. Gold Coast( was a Tier 3) and Auckland ( was a Tier 4), mostly were for lower ranked players. Now we have Brisbane, Sydney, Hobart, Auckland, Shenzen and most top players took part in 2, 3 events. Plus Hopman cup and exhibition in Hongkong and Thailand that interested some top players.




Also, the competition is a lot more brutal now. A lot of players out there hitting a lot bigger, harder, running faster. Early rounds are not as easy comparing to 10 years ago and take more tolls out of top players. Therefore, having a Premier right after a Slam is not a good idea now.

Off the top of my head, Hingis in 2001 played Hopman Cup. Singles and doubles at Sydney and the Australian Open and flew to Tokyo and won there.

I don't believe that the game from 2001 is a lot bigger, harder, running, faster from then.

She managed to beat Serena, Venus, Davenport x2 during that month.

[dragonflies]

Originally Posted by babsi

Off the top of my head, Hingis in 2001 played Hopman Cup. Singles and doubles at Sydney and the Australian Open and flew to Tokyo and won there.

I don't believe that the game from 2001 is a lot bigger, harder, running, faster from then.

She managed to beat Serena, Venus, Davenport x2 during that month.

So?



My post was talking about the players in today's game in general, not singled out a specific player. The bold part of yours doesn't make any sense. I said there are more players taller, hitting harder now, not in 2001. So your argument basically proves my point ie it's harder now than in the past to play more events.




Hingis experienced burned out in 2001-02, so perhaps it'd better for her sake that she had played less, then she can play more after 2002. Top players these days, including Radwanska whom was ridiculed by this board for playing many events, know their limits, so they didn't commit to Paris, even it's a Premier that offers lots of points.

[babsi]

Originally Posted by dragonflies

So?



My post was talking about the players in today's game in general, not singled out a specific player The bold part of yours doesn't make any sense. I said there are more players taller, hitting harder now, not in 2001. So your argument basically proves my point ie it's harder now than in the past to play more events.




Hingis experienced burned out in 2001-02, so perhaps it'd better for her sake that she had played less, then she can play more after 2002. Top players these days, including Radwanska whom was ridiculed by this board for playing many events, know their limits, so they didn't commit to Paris, even it's a Premier that offers lots of points.

YOU were talking about early 00 players so I gave you example of one that managed with that schedule. Another example:
Davenport 99: Hopman Cup, Sydney, Australian Open, Tokyo

I don't believe there is much difference from now to the early 00's in terms of fitness. Again off the top of my head Venus was tall, Davenport as well. Both would hit the ball VERY hard alongside Serena, Seles, Capriati...

Using your example of Radwanska, to start with, she has never played Paris. Who knows the reasons she didn't commit to playing, maybe she just wanted a week at home, who knows. If she had of played, her schedule would have been Auckland - Sydney - Australian Open - Paris - Fed Cup - Doha -Dubai. No sane top player would commit to that schedule and play eight weeks straight so has a week off in the middle.

[dragonflies]

Originally Posted by babsi

YOU were talking about early 00 players so I gave you example of one that managed with that schedule. Another example:
Davenport 99: Hopman Cup, Sydney, Australian Open, Tokyo

I don't believe there is much difference from now to the early 00's in terms of fitness. Again off the top of my head Venus was tall, Davenport as well. Both would hit the ball VERY hard alongside Serena, Seles, Capriati...

Using your example of Radwanska, to start with, she has never played Paris. Who knows the reasons she didn't commit to playing, maybe she just wanted a week at home, who knows. If she had of played, her schedule would have been Auckland - Sydney - Australian Open - Paris - Fed Cup - Doha -Dubai. No sane top player would commit to that schedule and play eight weeks straight so has a week off in the middle.

Gosh, I was talking about the general fitness and the brutal of the game now, not in 2001. That's why it takes toll now more than in the past. Lower ranked players in the top 100 nowadays have more " ballbashers" who can hit the balls very hard, so hitting with those players at every tournament would be hard on the body. Not that much though, but combined with top players playing more events BEFORE the AO. Therefore I said Radwanska, even viewed by "vultured" by people here, doesn't go to Paris.




My original statement was : " Also, the competition is a lot more brutal now. A lot of players out there hitting a lot bigger, harder, running faster. Early rounds are not as easy comparing to 10 years ago and take more tolls out of top players. Therefore, having a Premier right after a Slam is not a good idea now. ".


Talking about arguing over nothing.

[MyskinaManiac]

Paris would serve its purpose the week after the US Open. In terms of travel it would not be taxing. Had Stacey used her brains she would have switched Guangzhou and Tashkent so that more of a road map to Tokyo and Beijing was paved. But let's face it, she doesn't want Tokyo either, it's not about Asia, it's more about China.

[JarkaFish]

Originally Posted by MyskinaManiac

Paris would serve its purpose the week after the US Open. In terms of travel it would not be taxing. Had Stacey used her brains she would have switched Guangzhou and Tashkent so that more of a road map to Tokyo and Beijing was paved. But let's face it, she doesn't want Tokyo either, it's not about Asia, it's more about China.

Precisely.

[Curtos07]

Originally Posted by coolfish1103

I have no problem if they are killing Cincinnati for Wuhan, not Tokyo for Wuhan.

Please, no. Cincy is by far the closest to where I live.

[Talula]

The crowds are poor for lots of reasons. The same reasons there was hardly anyone in the live thread on here, fewer posts about the matches, and generally little interest: there were few big names in the tournament; there were relatively early exits of players with a name; it is straight after a Grand Slam; there was a better line up of players in Thailand - WTA really fucked up; it's January/February and bleak weather in Northern Europe, we don't like going out unless we have to; indoors tennis is dying - people prefer outdoor events; WTA is losing popularity in comparison to ATP.

The above does not warrant moving anything to China. The WTA at the minute are thick - they should drop this event.

[Xepher]

Ah one more thing - the lack of hawkeye shows how much fucks the organisers give about this event.

[Wilson_07]

The problem is, that most tennis-fans are only interested in a small group of elite players. If certain players aren't competing at tournaments, no one seems to be interested anymore.
You can see it even on this forum. The most viewed threads are about the same players, with the most 'star-potential', whereas a thread about the Pattaya-final is barely recognised.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Xepher

Ah one more thing - the lack of hawkeye shows how much fucks the organisers give about this event.

The Paris indoor arena is only a few blocks away from Roland Garros so why couldn't the stingy French tennis Feds just temporarily borrow some of the hawk-eye cameras from there?