PDA

View Full Version : Mr. Mickey : 4 categories of tournaments


vive le beau jeu !
02-22-2007, 04:45 AM
ATP tournaments in 2009 will come under four categories of importance, the four grand slams, the Masters Series, 10 other selected events and the rest.

In the fourth category, the fans will not see the top players but that fits in the strategy of De Villiers.

"Just as in football we have to make clear to the people that tennis also acknowledges a second and third division."
from : http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=reu-menrotterdamdc&prov=reuters&type=lgns

i know there are already several categories (international series, international series gold...) but he obviously wants to make a more obvious difference between big and small tournaments... does he wanna kill small tournaments ?

i don't like his comparison with soccer. tennis is different.
if a top player wanna play a small tournament because it fits in his schedule or because of any reason, he can and that's good for small tournaments.
it's not like divisions in soccer (if he wants something that sounds like these divisions, challenger/future/satellite tours already exist).

holera
02-22-2007, 10:26 AM
i think it's terrible to play the masters cup in london.
masters cup is 1 of biggest opportunities to attract new fans, but london will just get the same fans that go to wimbledon.
there are better locations just in europe.
they should rotate masters cup locations each year, to expand the publicity of tennis.

a masters series in china is a great idea. i wish they would rotate masters series events every year, like the canadian open does with montreal/toronto.

it seems like a good idea to force top players to play fewer small events, but it also means that those small events probably will be ignored by the public. it could also mean that some players cannot play in their local tourneys. for example, gonzalez might not be allowed to play in vina del mar, or federer might not be allowed to play in basel.

Moose Malloy
02-22-2007, 11:33 AM
this is getting interesting, like we might be heading towards a time the like the 70s, where many players played on completely different tours.

not sure what I think, but I like that this guy is trying more new things in his short time than all the the atp heads combined have tried since 1990.


i think it's terrible to play the masters cup in london.
masters cup is 1 of biggest opportunities to attract new fans, but london will just get the same fans that go to wimbledon.


The Wembley event in the 70s/80s was one of the most important events on tour in those days, I think its great that London can host another big event.

I think there is always a danger in going too much towards a country where tennis is just now getting popular(like China) That interest could dry up in a few years, like it did with Germany at the end of the 90s & the ATP will get egg on their face.

England & the US have shown they have enough $ to sustain big events for the last 50 years, best to stick to countries where you know tennis isn't just a fad.

malakas
02-22-2007, 10:08 PM
This is terrible!
England with the Masters Cup?So now England with a Slam and a Masters and a big grass tournament..whilst Germany will be left only with Halle?I suppose they will cancel the Hamburg Master..
and also a big player won't be able to play his local tournament if it's in the fouth division?:confused: ..:sad:

This guy in the name of change does really stupid things.

BeckerFan
02-23-2007, 11:07 AM
I fully agree, Moose.

When a sport strays too far from its core audience, it quickly lands itself in trouble.

Look what happened to the NHL ...

Moose Malloy
02-23-2007, 02:46 PM
"We will also move the Masters Cup to Europe. It will be called the ATP World Tour Finals and I would like it to be played in London."


I think this is the 4th name change to this event so far.

just read this:

A day after Hewitt withdrew, ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers spoke about the ATP's plans for 2009 and how last-minute withdrawals should be dealt with in the future. "They will be not just fined; they will be suspended," said the South African of players who cancel events at the last moment. "What we want to stop is [unfit] players entering tournaments just to see how they get on."

One of De Villiers' biggest concerns with tennis is that the sport has not evolved like some other sports. He wants to create a new tournament system, where fans can recognize the nature of the event by points allocation. "Most fans don't understand how the system works," he said. "The four Slams are great, but we need to make it better. We need to have something else. When I came to this job, I didn't know what a Masters Series event stood for, and I was a big tennis fan."

There are currently nine Masters Series events, of which the top players need to play seven. There will be a cutback to eight of these tournaments, and de Villiers says players will need to take part in all of them.

de Villiers' plans received a less than cordial reception from some top players during at the Australian Open. One source told TennisReporters.net that both Federer and Andy Roddick were livid about the plan to mandate player participate in all the Masters Series events. Last week in San Jose, Marat Safin came out firmly against mandatory tournaments, saying that players should only have to commit to four to five Masters Series tournaments.

http://www.tennisreporters.net/hewitt_rotterdam_022207_c.html

holera
02-23-2007, 03:48 PM
this is getting interesting, like we might be heading towards a time the like the 70s, where many players played on completely different tours.

not sure what I think, but I like that this guy is trying more new things in his short time than all the the atp heads combined have tried since 1990.




The Wembley event in the 70s/80s was one of the most important events on tour in those days, I think its great that London can host another big event.

I think there is always a danger in going too much towards a country where tennis is just now getting popular(like China) That interest could dry up in a few years, like it did with Germany at the end of the 90s & the ATP will get egg on their face.

England & the US have shown they have enough $ to sustain big events for the last 50 years, best to stick to countries where you know tennis isn't just a fad.

why not some other european country then? or rotate around europe. it's not like only UK can support tennis.