Tennis Forum banner

Should WTA start its equivalent to ATP Masters Series?

  • Sure, why not?

    Votes: 9 69.2%
  • No, being a copycat does you no freaky good.

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Well, the current WTA tour is doing a great job, so I don't think it's quite necessary.

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • I don't give a damn. Just let the players' racquet do the talk.

    Votes: 1 7.7%
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
what's your take on this?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,681 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,514 Posts
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?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,514 Posts
no prizemoney. I mean, if all top players have to be there, you need to have the money.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
821 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Why?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,950 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,950 Posts
it's a great idea in-terms of quality of play but maybe for other reasons it isn't quite as good.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
403 Posts
This is very interesting!!

Because like this only then is interesting!

You think? ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
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....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,731 Posts
Tier 1 events do need to be re-branded. WTA Mistresses would be inappropraite though.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
182,023 Posts
villa said:
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
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top