Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Is it only me who thinks that the mandatory events this year on the WTA Tour have sucked? I'm a fan of women's tennis so I am not trying to bash it but look:

Indian Wells: - Williams sisters don't show up; Jankovic, Dementieva, Safina and Kuznetsova all crash out very early; boring semi finals; horrific (OK, so it was very windy) final. Many players evidently didn't want to show up for this event and it showed - I didn't see one good-quality match.

Miami: - Serena gets injured and the final is dull - between two shriekers. Many plauyers again lose early. Tennis better quality than IW, but not by much.

Madrid: - Most of the seeds (including WS, Kuznetsova, Dementieva, Azarenka) crash out; pushers like Wozniacki and Bondarenko make it to the QF, most of the matches just boring UE fests. Only entertaining one is Mauresmo.

I have seen some good WTA Tour matches this season, it's just not one of these has come from the Mandatory Events and I think it's time the WTA gives up this idea and moves back to the old Tier I-II-III-IV system as that was much better. THe new scheduling for WTA tournaments is crappy also IMO. You get loads of tournaments which everyone plays in in one massive block and then you have to wait for ages before the next big clump of tourneys comes along.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
712 Posts
i think it creates an immediate resentment of the tourn from some players because it kind of means they can't do their own schedules exactly how they want it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,049 Posts
It's just the way it is nowadays. It's not the system / roadmap. It's the top players nowadays are often not good enough to make it through and they are often playing hard matches because the standard in the women's game is much deeper nowadays.

I mean we've hardly had a good match at the FO for years. And we had top players crashing out early at last years' Wimbledon and RG. But no-one seriously advocates not calling those tournament slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,686 Posts
This is just first year of new roadmap.
It works great for years in ATP, so no reasons to believe that will sucks at WTA. :shrug:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,270 Posts
Mandatory Events is a way to make players play. yet logically and realistically nobody can make a player play a tennis match. I think the idea is ridiculous.

Players, can and will get on aplane and withdraw and retire and tank. To conserve energy and money in the wallets.

The idea is dumb, because it's has many loopholes that players will only take advantage of and get around. If the system wants to beat you, then by any means necessary beat the sytem. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,654 Posts
I think the idea is good, but the implementation is far from perfect. I believe there is an issue with scheduling. There are mandatory events and events that traditionally drew a lot good players even though they are not mandatory this year. They seem to plotted on the timeline in bunches and it frustrates the players. Whoever planned the schedule did not do a good job.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
181,942 Posts
only bad rule WTA have done is
for top 10 they cannot withdraw from any P5 or any Premier event they have entered or they get a 0 Pointer on their best 16 for 52 weeks.
 

·
Serena's #1 Hater
Joined
·
19,697 Posts
only bad rule WTA have done is
for top 10 they cannot withdraw from any P5 or any Premier event they have entered or they get a 0 Pointer on their best 16 for 52 weeks.
You don't think that's a small price to pay for the increase in prize money? I do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152,750 Posts
I don't like mandatories, but I have seen a few matches from Madrid, and most have actually been quite good.
 

·
upset I can't delete posts anymore
Joined
·
10,148 Posts
Mandatory Events is a way to make players play. yet logically and realistically nobody can make a player play a tennis match. I think the idea is ridiculous.

Players, can and will get on aplane and withdraw and retire and tank. To conserve energy and money in the wallets.

The idea is dumb, because it's has many loopholes that players will only take advantage of and get around. If the system wants to beat you, then by any means necessary beat the sytem. :)
Players who hate the roadmap or the schedule can tank. But they don't have to. The men can play high quality tennis year round even though they hate to do so. The women I think simply are not consistent enough with their level of play, and that the lower tier of players are more capable of beating the top players than ever before.



Also mandatories are absolutely necessary. No mandatories means not enough players will show up. If they dont show up, spectators wont show up. Then sponsors pull out, the tour is downsized, prize money decreases thus less players on tour leading to less interest in womens tennis and even less sponsors, and eventually the end of women's tennis as a sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
The problem is it's a trade-off between flexibility for the players and the size of the purse ($$$). Only by getting the top players at the bigger tourneys can the organizers raise the revenue to pay the higher prize money that the players want. It's a partnership in that regard --- hence the revenue sharing that players get who make all the required events. Sponsors, advertisers, tv contracts, municipalities, and vendors all pay more money if more fans come to the event, and more fans come to the event if they expect more lower seeds such as 1-10. The WTA also needs to distribute the known players among the mid-level tourneys so they all stay financially viable, thus the 4/5 premiers.

In short, the players agreed to give up some of their flexibility in order to get a shot at much larger paydays. They may well collectively decide to go back to smaller prize money and more freedom after a trial with the Roadmap.

It makes sense that more top seeds will go out on the lower rounds of big events --- just on probability alone, there are more matches so more chances for flukes, young upstarts, or bad days. Plus all the best players are there compared to the MM tourneys, so tougher competition. And if the field is deep, there may be little meaningful difference between a player ranked 8th and one who is 20th. What looks like an upset (by comparing ranking alone) may actually not be one.

I think the idea is good, but the implementation is far from perfect. I believe there is an issue with scheduling. There are mandatory events and events that traditionally drew a lot good players even though they are not mandatory this year. They seem to plotted on the timeline in bunches and it frustrates the players. Whoever planned the schedule did not do a good job.
Agreed, this is a big problem. It's insane to have 2 premier mandatory events (IW and Miami) back-to-back, and then premier Rome one week before mandatory Madrid, which is just before a Slam. Yet other months are lightly scheduled such as Feb-March. My guess is that the tourney sites don't have much flexibility to drastically move their dates. There's got to be good reasons for this bunching and skipping pattern, or else the WTA would have solved it already.
 

·
Serena's #1 Hater
Joined
·
19,697 Posts
In short, the players agreed to give up some of their flexibility in order to get a shot at much larger paydays. They may well collectively decide to go back to smaller prize money and more freedom after a trial with the Roadmap.
That's all that really needs to be said about the subject. Moderators, you can lock this thread now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114,715 Posts
It's a different game than when players used wood rackets.
Players need some time between tournaments.
IW and Miami should be separated. Madrid shouldn't be this close to the FO.

If they want the best players at these events and playing well, they need to space them out, away from each other or majors
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
It's a different game than when players used wood rackets.
Wow, how about a tourney with all '60s style wooden rackets? What fun! Bye-bye matches won on serves alone and bone-crushing baseline rallies. Might even see some serve-and-volleys. But probably half the current field would have a career-ending nervous breakdown and then the WTA would really be stuck in the mud.

--
 

·
#GloballyEli
Joined
·
16,291 Posts
i think it creates an immediate resentment of the tourn from some players because it kind of means they can't do their own schedules exactly how they want it.
Exactly. I hate this mandatory tournament crap - unfair that they are forced to play places they don't want to play, and it makes it look very unprofessional when the top players (some obviously don't want to be there) lose in the early rounds and just seem to turn up because they don't want to pay the huge fines. And most of all it's sad for the fans who pay money to go to see these players...I would prefer to see a player who actually wants to play there, rather than someone who is just going through the motions because they have no way to get out of it :help:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
712 Posts
prime example this week kuzzy. after going deep in the last 2 tourns she would much rather have take a couple of weeks off before the french but instead she went out and clearly did not want to be there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,270 Posts
Players who hate the roadmap or the schedule can tank. But they don't have to. The men can play high quality tennis year round even though they hate to do so. The women I think simply are not consistent enough with their level of play, and that the lower tier of players are more capable of beating the top players than ever before.
Also mandatories are absolutely necessary. No mandatories means not enough players will show up. If they dont show up, spectators wont show up. Then sponsors pull out, the tour is downsized, prize money decreases thus less players on tour leading to less interest in womens tennis and even less sponsors, and eventually the end of women's tennis as a sport.
I disagree. The problem is that the WTA Tour refuses to promote their players. They only talk about the top ten and those who are attractive. They refuse to promote the personality and the backstory.
Fans love stories and personalities. Fans love tennis. People will watch tennis but when top players pull out and nobody has featured the lesser known player, nobody wants to watch the match. Showcase tennis and ALL players. CSN has anice game and story. I haven't heard of the kid before the Aussie Open?? Why is that?
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top