Joined
·
26,920 Posts
- Some players will have to play 1+ matches a day.Some key points that are interesting
-All tournaments below WTA/ATP tours have to reduce their schedule to 7 days of play, 32 MD and 24 QD to make player scheduling easier.
-$25Ks will reserve 5 main draw spots for highest players in ITF Entry Standings. Transition Tour tournaments will reserve up to 5 spots for top-100 juniors.
-ITF Entry Points (15K/15K+H)
W: 100/150
RU: 60/90
SF: 45/30
QF: 18/23
R2: 6/4
R1: 0/0
Qualifiers: 3/2
QFR: 1/1
-ITF Entry Point Standings based on best 10 results in previous 12 months. The way this is structured pretty much only players who reach SF or better of multiple 15Ks will get high enough in ITF Entry Standings to move up to 25K level.
-ITF Entry Points (15K/15K+H)
W: 100/150
RU: 60/90
SF: 45/30
QF: 18/23
R2: 6/4
R1: 0/0
Qualifiers: 3/2
QFR: 1/1
-The plan would be Qualifying on Monday & Tuesday, Main Draw Wednesday to Sunday, so 1 match every day.- Some players will have to play 1+ matches a day.
- Good/Top 100 Juniors would enter 25ks easily IMO. :shrug:
Sorry, just my mistake in copying it over, of course it should be the other way.What?? Why do players from qualies through SFs earn MORE points in a 15K than in a 15K+H??
Interesting that players will now win points for qualifying, though. That's new.
And I would like to hear about any time that any top 100 player has ever entered a 10K/15K. It just doesn't happen.
It seems the point is to have fewer professional players who would (ideally at least) earn more money.Seriously WTA, ATP and ITF discussed and came up with this? :lol: What's the point of it, really?
Deducting the 15k points to 0? Because what, the winner of these got too many points or what? :lol:
Yeah, I wonder why I haven't heard about all those top players who play ITF 15k because winning less money is more funThe ITF, ATP and WTA will implement new ‘play-down’ rules to prevent higher-ranked players from competing in transition tour tournaments to maximise opportunities for other players. Currently anyone outside the Top 10 women or Top 150 men can play in $15,000 events. Under the new structure it is expected that most players with ATP and WTA rankings would choose to enter professional tournaments.
And who plays 15k to need that rule? :lol:
I couldn't agree with you more. Why do they want to get rid of half of their players? It just doesn't make sense. Apart from the huge loss of late bloomers we will miss.. Firstly, I think it is fantastic that people can make a living from a pro career just enough to follow their passion. What is wrong with having more tennis players?! It grows the game! Secondly, the poorer countries who have players who struggle to travel are really going to feel this and have to end their chances of making it as a pro early. It's extremely unfair to poorer nations. Just the fact that such nations may have more pro players serving as role models (just for living on the pro tour, regardless of their ranking) for the younger generation - this is going to be lost. Younger generations are going to play other sports. Dumb move and not in favour of growing the sport. The more people play the sport, the more they will watch it too. So they will lose out on viewers too.It seems the point is to have fewer professional players who would (ideally at least) earn more money.
"This structure is expected to reduce the number of professional players with ATP and WTA rankings from 3,000 players to approximately 750 men and 750 women."
Basically they want to weed out players before they become pros and get to higher-level ITFs: if you can't win enough 15k you don't get to the professional level, and since you can't sustain this for long you need to go back to school or something.
Seems to me that's a very bad thing in the long term, they'll get rid of players who could be great late-bloomers, and players from a rich family or helped by a rich federation will be given even more of an advantage.
They are using this as an excuse. I don't see that happening.Yeah, I wonder why I haven't heard about all those top players who play ITF 15k because winning less money is more fun![]()
I actually think a lot of what you've said here is exactly what they're looking to address... we don't yet know exactly how those doing well in transitionary rankings will translate into allowance into WTA/25k+ events, but if a late bloomer is doing very well at ITF level then they'll soon work their way into higher draws (Remember, 25k+ is still under WTA point system).I couldn't agree with you more. Why do they want to get rid of half of their players? It just doesn't make sense. Apart from the huge loss of late bloomers we will miss.. Firstly, I think it is fantastic that people can make a living from a pro career just enough to follow their passion. What is wrong with having more tennis players?! It grows the game! Secondly, the poorer countries who have players who struggle to travel are really going to feel this and have to end their chances of making it as a pro early. It's extremely unfair to poorer nations. Just the fact that such nations may have more pro players serving as role models (just for living on the pro tour, regardless of their ranking) for the younger generation - this is going to be lost. Younger generations are going to play other sports. Dumb move and not in favour of growing the sport. The more people play the sport, the more they will watch it too. So they will lose out on viewers too.
Have there been any players who have been ranked outside top 750 for a long period of time that later on in their career moved up to the top 150 for a long period of their career?Basically they want to weed out players before they become pros and get to higher-level ITFs: if you can't win enough 15k you don't get to the professional level, and since you can't sustain this for long you need to go back to school or something.
Seems to me that's a very bad thing in the long term, they'll get rid of players who could be great late-bloomers, and players from a rich family or helped by a rich federation will be given even more of an advantage.