Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
IThe WTA has only 16 players invited to the Championships and it's not fair for the other 16 who otherwise would have been seeded at a grand slam...if the grand slams have 32 seeds shouldn't the year-end have 32 players in the draw?...


The Wta should offer several players ranked below 32 in the rankings, a chance to play in the year end...because it'll be more like a chance for that player to experience the feeling of playing in the year end...especially if that player has not to the top 32 in five years on the tour...

If a player below 32 in rank and has more than five years on the tour they should be nominated for entry to the year-end....

The #1 and #2 players shoiuld draw those players.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
I like how the Chase is and I think thats why you have the whole season to get up there. PLUS ITS NOT A GS!

[ October 10, 2001: Message edited by: VtennisA ]
 

·
Devoted Capriati-Ite
Joined
·
185,384 Posts
Well, the "Majors" do have 32, and I think the Chase should have the top 32 as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
It's only fair because the year end has only 16 seeds and the point of the grand slams were too also let the players know where they are when the GS rolled around...if you receive a seed then you are still in the running for the year end.....if you didn't receive a seed then you knew you had work to do....

If the GS seed 32 then the WTA should increase to 32 seeds.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,131 Posts
I think it's stupid to take the first 32 ...

And a grand slam it's totally different, there you have 128 players at the main draw, at the chase championships only 16!!!

And the Atp-championship have always had 8 players... So I gues we may be happy with the 16 we have now <IMG SRC="smilies/wink.gif" border="0">

[ October 10, 2001: Message edited by: kimclijsters4ever ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,095 Posts
I also don´t see any problems at all and have 32 seeds.. if we had 32 in all GS this year, why not put 32 seeds, also in a important tournament as GS, like Chase??
I think would happen more surprises, and the tournament would be more equilibrated. IMO <IMG SRC="smilies/wink.gif" border="0">
 

·
Adrenaline junkie
Joined
·
23,024 Posts
If the choice would be mine, I'd do it the way ATP does. 8 instead of 16, and round-robin format. I just love round robin. Just imagine:

Group 1:
Hingis, Davenport, Clijsters, Serena
Group 2:
Capriati, Venus, Henin, Seles

And round robin.. That would be one hell of a tournament, one and only WTA tournament that would easily beat its ATP counterpart.
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
20,610 Posts
I think 16 is enough. It is supposed to be an exclusive tournament. Besides as others pointed out, the ATP only has 8 people... so we should be glad!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,836 Posts
Well it would have to be in a venue were there were more indoor courts. Not sure what the site is in Munich but Madison Square Garden would be definitely out in the event it would increase to a draw of 32.

But I am one that likes the way the format is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,017 Posts
In my opinion 16 is enough, but i don't like that they're playing like regular tournament.

it should be like the atp, using round robin system, but have 4 pools and 4 players in it.

they got paid a lot, and it's been a tough job for the players just to reach the top 16. and what do they got lost in the first round and goodbye....

using the orund robin would be a very good solution. and each players play at least 3 times. the winner of each pools will meet in the semi final

how do u guys like it?
 

·
Plainclothes Division
Joined
·
6,350 Posts
I like it the way it is now. Limiting it to 16 gives the tournament an elite feel, which it should have. It also gives the fall indoor season some drama, as players scramble for the remaining spots. If there were more spots available, the top 20 players would be playing less, and weaken the indoor fields.

Adding to the prestige is that it's the only tournament (slams included) to award significant points for a first round exit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
i agree with ys make it the way the ATP Maters Cup is that way the top players will still be there and they will have all the to work to ensure they make it to the presigious year-end championships. Unless of course the tournament is moved and on of your guarenteed top players can't play!! <IMG SRC="smilies/mad.gif" border="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
i like the way it is, & besides if it becomes of 32 players then it won't be that interesting, but i would love if it becomes 16 teams instead of only 8
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,372 Posts
Brian has made the best point against a 32 draw. It's hard enough to get the women to show up after the Open, even with money "under the table". Adding to the field reduces incentives.

If anything, I'm with ys in favoring a round robin, double elimination. This way the promotors are assured the big names are there at least 2 or 3 nights, not just a day <IMG SRC="smilies/smile.gif" border="0">

The argument that Munich must have 32 because the slams do doesn't hold up when you look at the lack of excitement in women's matches at Wimbledon and the US Open. Only one big upset happened, and that was due to
Hingis having a bad back.

[ October 11, 2001: Message edited by: Rollo ]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,735 Posts
Actually Rollo the French had one big upset : Schett over Venus.

If you count Mauresmo going out in the first round it had two upsets.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,372 Posts
EXACTLY Big Tennis Fan. The French had more early upsets BECAUSE the 32 seed wasn't in place. The change didn't happen until
Wimbledon.


PS . Sorry BTF, my original post said "French"
when I meant Us Open.

[ October 11, 2001: Message edited by: Rollo ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,315 Posts
It's not a All-Comers event like a Slam. Its a year end championship for the best of the best, and should stay that way.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
53 Posts
Exactly,

The end of season championship final 16 is decided on a totally different basis to the seeds at slams anyway.

We are not talking about ranking players for seeding purpose in a draw.

The Championships is the best of the best from ONE year - nothing to do with seedings which are determined using the regular rankings which we all think mean nothing anyway!! <IMG SRC="smilies/tongue.gif" border="0">

[ October 12, 2001: Message edited by: Penne ]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,664 Posts
I love it the way it is, the only thing I would change is the players are seeded exactly how they finished.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top