Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 203 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,458 Posts


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:

The 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 really don't see the point in making the system that complex. Don't have another Executive who is going to run the ITF transitional tour, just give more scholarships or raise the ITF prize money. Besides the 10k going to 15k, it's been the same since the Graf times FFS.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,740 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,967 Posts
Too complicated. This 2 rankings systems is gonna be confusing. They can just get rid of AER and allow boys and girls to play wherever and whenever they want. :shrug:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,458 Posts
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.
- Some players will have to play 1+ matches a day.
- Good/Top 100 Juniors would enter 25ks easily IMO. :shrug:
 
  • Like
Reactions: rafaelkafka

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,920 Posts
-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
:confused: 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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,740 Posts
- Some players will have to play 1+ matches a day.
- Good/Top 100 Juniors would enter 25ks easily IMO. :shrug:
-The plan would be Qualifying on Monday & Tuesday, Main Draw Wednesday to Sunday, so 1 match every day.
-Good juniors can still get WCs for 25K and above tournaments, so they can skip transition tour if they are good enough and prove themselves in those tournaments quick.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,740 Posts
:confused: 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.
Sorry, just my mistake in copying it over, of course it should be the other way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,458 Posts
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:
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.


The 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:
Yeah, I wonder why I haven't heard about all those top players who play ITF 15k because winning less money is more fun :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,889 Posts
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.
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.

Yeah, I wonder why I haven't heard about all those top players who play ITF 15k because winning less money is more fun :confused:
They are using this as an excuse. I don't see that happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm actually feeling positive about these changes. It'll be really interesting to see how the 'projected' rankings shape up this year before they actually come into force in 2019...

One thing I discovered from Jo Durie's commentary in St Petersburg the other day is that they are apparently playing lets on-serve on the ITF tour now, which I find to be more of a source of annoyance in my opinion. For the sake of all that's good, at least restrict that change to 15ks only...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
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.
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).

The actual aim is to address the fact that so many players (even from 125-200) are struggling to break even financially, so by breaking up the two tiers like this, the prize money for 15ks will *remain the same*, only they will be more affordable, both for players to play (less travel expenses as they're more localised) and for national associations to stage (meaning that poorer countries, and those with a smaller pool of players e.g. much of Africa, will actually benefit as opposed to lose out).

As for "losing out on viewers", if I'm not mistaken, the ITF also recently announced the launch of a streaming service for their tour, whereas before, most of us were unable to watch ITF matches full-stop anyway. This won't discourage amateurs from playing tennis. It'll just make it more financially viable for them, and the cream-of-the-crop who are good enough for pro level should be able to navigate to the next level without the 4+ year transitionary period (which is currently growing in both WTA and ATP).
 

·
Art & Futures
Joined
·
20,620 Posts
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.
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? :confused:

I'm also not entirely sure how this is unfair to poorer nations because the 15ks still exist, particularly if the 25ks and up can still give out Wildcards. While it means less 25k+ opportunities for those ranked below 15k, it also means less 150 ranked players in the 15k (how often does a 150 and up rank player play these tournaments?) Maybe 150 is too high though and it should be at rank 200. :shrug:
 
  • Like
Reactions: bjurra

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,820 Posts
These actually look like pretty positive changes.

One of the huge drawbacks of the current system is the gulf between 15Ks and 25Ks - the points on offer for being a consistent 15K performer barely get you into many 25K qualy draws, unless you can travel to the far-flung weak ones. So you see plenty of players getting stuck in a cycle of putting up decent results but being unable to break out of Sharm el Sheikh or Antalya. This fixes that by easing the transition up to 25Ks (as well as from the junior circuit to 15Ks in the first place). The tournaments themselves remain the same.

I don't think this affects the finances of 15K players that much - in fact by properly organising them geographically it probably helps them. They can't CALL themselves "professional" but that's just a label - as things currently stand most 15K players are semi-pro. But news flash, you ALREADY can't sustain yourself for years in 15Ks unless you've got some money behind you. The only late bloomers we see come from financial privilege. Maybe not zillionaire wealth but solidly middle class at the very worst. Go to any British 15K, for instance, and the amount of posh accents you hear is overwhelming.

I also don't think 15Ks should be financially sustainable full time. Sure, a late bloomer might be able to plug away for years before rising - but the more common flipside is that it's used as a kind of extended gap year for middle-class kids who are just crap at tennis to bum around for a few years before getting a job at daddy's company. Yeah, weed them out. Almost every late bloomer we've seen make it to the top 100 has at least made it to 25K level to grind away for all those years.

What pro players and former pro players (like Naomi Cavaday) actually say about 15Ks is that they'd rather the expenses (travel, accommodation) are eased than have a token rise in prize money that still barely covers your outgoings. This seems designed with that in mind.

25Ks absolutely should be more sustainable, because that IS where you find potential late bloomers and players with proper tour possibilities. This seems to encourage that as well - but let's be real, if you're really interested in improving access to the sport for poorer kids, anything the ITF does will only scratch the surface. There's lots and lots still to do.

Not sure how complex the double ranking system will be but that's only bad for ranking nerds who will have to update all their spreadsheets :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,833 Posts
These are good changes. The level of competition will improve across the board in the ITFs now. The cream will rise to the top, making 25k draws much tougher with 5 spots reserved for the Class of the 15ks.
The 15k players who are chasing a pipe dream will be driven out sooner, and they're probably better off for it. The ones who tough it out will see immediate tangible rewards by just making it to the 25k level.

There are just way too many "pro" players in tennis. This system puts an end to the rich ones buying their way into a million 15ks and scrounging up enough points to dilute the fields of 25ks.

I also like that the cost of hosting a 15k tournament will be decreased. That will hopefully allow more upstart tennis countries to better support their players.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
I think these are some great changes and will really separate the top level pros from the also-rans. At the same time, the also-rans and juniors will have an opportunity to transition to the bigger stages. Reminds me of the way the Women's tour used to operate during the Virginia Slims/Avon era when players moved up or down between the main tour and the secondary tour, based on their performance. What will be interesting is what is the ranking cutoff for playing in the 15Ks?

Interestingly, Kumkhum -- the girls from Thailand who made third round of Aussie Open -- played a 15K as her warmup tourney. She made the QFs and defaulted if I'm remembering correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,449 Posts
This is all good.. I have been wishing to structure the tour like the European soccer leagues.
Every year, those who finish at the bottom of the Premier WTA move down to the lower league, and the best lower league players take their spots in the Premier.
These changes are not quite there, but they are a good attempt to sort things out.
Should have been implemented this year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,383 Posts
I've been emailing the ITF back and forth about this and they sent me another email this morning

I like most of these changes except for the one where qualies get reduced to only 24 players instead of 64 or sometimes 128. This will unfortunately reduce the opportunities of many players. Unless of course there are many tours going on at once. For instance 3 tourneys with 24 entries as opposed to one with 64, but then that increases the need for travel too.

I like the initiative on its face, I just hope in the end everyone has equal opportunity to play.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,097 Posts
So at the end the ITF gets rid off the 15,000$ events just have a 15,000$ transition event?

How will this work to make the competition more international? Will they have transition events eg in Djibouti? At the end this would lead to the following:

  • we will have a random mediocre player to make the Pro level whose ass will get beaten all the time or
  • we will have some decent player from a rich backround who will travel to exotic places to enter those weak transition tournaments
At the end we will have the same problem and more likely a less international competition with boring "national" transition tournaments.


Also a comeback will be probably much more difficult and will take much longer
 
1 - 20 of 203 Posts
Top