PDA

View Full Version : The real ATP scheduling issue has nothing to do with clay...


OrangeOne
05-07-2008, 03:50 PM
...and everything to do with a lack of grass tournaments!

It's ridiculous to hear all of this whinging about there being too many clay tournaments with not enough gap between them, when the grass season is almost non existent.

Clay GS: 1 == Grass GS: 1
Clay Masters: 3 >> Grass Masters: 0
Clay regular tournaments: LOADS >>>>>>>>> Grass Regular: Not even a handful.

Why couldn't Halle or Queens be designated a masters? Why couldn't the grass season continue a bit after Wimbledon?

Before anyone whinges about a bit of a tight clay schedule, could we please whinge about an almost non-existent grass schedule?

Defcon
05-07-2008, 03:55 PM
Agreed. But you know what they will say - clay is the most popular surface, grass courts are rare, harder to maintain etc etc. Funny how this logic is used by those who want to argue against even Wimbledon!

And you will NEVER hear this from a clay courter (player or their fans), because it totally and completely exposes their games as limited to one surface.

CyBorg
05-07-2008, 03:56 PM
You'd have to get one of Wimbledon or Roland Garros to budge in terms of scheduling. If they don't you have only two weeks of grass tournaments between the two majors.

That's not enough to hold a masters series event. Another issue is the size of the venues. I know that Queen's is rather smallish. Not sure about Halle, but that's probably also the case.

I would prefer the Aussie to go back to grass. I don't mind no masters series events on the surface.

Defcon
05-07-2008, 03:59 PM
On the other hand there seems to be this magical month in tennis where we go from the red clay to the green lawns, and no one wants to mess with that.

Why not have some grass tournaments after Wimbledon?

OrangeOne
05-07-2008, 04:06 PM
^^ Yup, as I said, there's no reason Wimbledon needs to be the end of the grass season. We do have hardcourt events after the UO, and lord knows we have clay events almost every week...

gj011
05-07-2008, 04:07 PM
You'd have to get one of Wimbledon or Roland Garros to budge in terms of scheduling. If they don't you have only two weeks of grass tournaments between the two majors.

That's not enough to hold a masters series event. Another issue is the size of the venues. I know that Queen's is rather smallish. Not sure about Halle, but that's probably also the case.

I would prefer the Aussie to go back to grass. I don't mind no masters series events on the surface.

I agree. Problem with the short grass season is not the clay season schedule, but the fact that neither RG nor Wimbledon want to move.

And the fact that the grass season is so short does not have anything to do with the stupid and ridiculous clay schedule.

^^ Yup, as I said, there's no reason Wimbledon needs to be the end of the grass season. We do have hardcourt events after the UO, and lord knows we have clay events almost every week...

Nobody would play on these tournaments after Wimbledon. Also as someone said there are no venues and interested parties. Again nothing to do with this year clay season scheduling.

drakulie
05-07-2008, 04:13 PM
Nadal needs to manage his schedule better, and he would also be better off to stop playing singles and doubles.

That said, I wish the AO would have changed the surface to grass, or like the OP suggests, have at least one MS grass event before or after Wimbledon (preferrably before).

OrangeOne
05-07-2008, 04:17 PM
Nobody would play on these tournaments after Wimbledon.

That's not true. Designate one of them a Masters, or put up a few mill, or both, and people would play.

Also as someone said there are no venues and interested parties.

Err, the only comment on venues in this thread was the SIZE, not that there are no venues or interested parties.

Designate a masters, even after Wimbledon, and say that it must be on grass... and just WATCH the bids roll in, especially from India, Dubai and China. A new masters? Wham, there'd be bids left, right and centre.

Again nothing to do with this year clay season scheduling.

The only 'link' is simply that people are whinging on and on about the clay schedule, which seems fairly hypocritical given the complete lack of a grass court schedule at all.

It's like complaining about losing a dollar coin on the same day you found a $100 note.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 04:19 PM
I think they should pile up all the hard court tournaments into 1 month. See how the hard court specialists would think about that. Weak thread comparing clay to grass. Grass should be replacing hard court events.

OrangeOne
05-07-2008, 04:27 PM
I think they should pile up all the hard court tournaments into 1 month. See how the hard court specialists would think about that. Weak thread comparing clay to grass. Grass should be replacing hard court events.

There are bunches of hardcourt tournaments across the year, and bunches of clay tournaments across the year too.

Try finding a decent grass-court tournament in a month not starting with "Ju"...

Vision84
05-07-2008, 04:30 PM
...and everything to do with a lack of grass tournaments!

It's ridiculous to hear all of this whinging about there being too many clay tournaments with not enough gap between them, when the grass season is almost non existent.

Clay GS: 1 == Grass GS: 1
Clay Masters: 3 >> Grass Masters: 0
Clay regular tournaments: LOADS >>>>>>>>> Grass Regular: Not even a handful.

Why couldn't Halle or Queens be designated a masters? Why couldn't the grass season continue a bit after Wimbledon?

Before anyone whinges about a bit of a tight clay schedule, could we please whinge about an almost non-existent grass schedule?

I agree. We need more grass and less clay.

Defcon
05-07-2008, 04:32 PM
I think they should pile up all the hard court tournaments into 1 month. See how the hard court specialists would think about that. Weak thread comparing clay to grass. Grass should be replacing hard court events.

Bitter much?

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 04:41 PM
Bitter much?
Yes very bitter screwing up the schedule like they did. :mad: I don't mind more grass events if it replaces hard court events but clay is the best part of the year. I find the hard court season the most boring. Ball bashers,no patience, and lack of constructing points type players paradise.

drakulie
05-07-2008, 04:46 PM
Yes very bitter screwing up the schedule like they did. :mad:

Only one who screwed up anything was Nadal not managing his schedule better, and also playing doubles in many events. He also needs to go to a local drug store, get better cushions for his feet, so he doesn't get blisters and go crying about the schedule.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 04:49 PM
Only one who screwed up anything was Nadal not managing his schedule better, and also playing doubles in many events. He also needs to go to a local drug store, get better cushions for his feet, so he doesn't get blisters and go crying about the schedule.
Maybe you would not, but there are people who are doing that here.

Anyway you are all missing a point here. Nadal obviously does not WANT to skip Barcelona. It is important to him. And saying "he should have skipped Barcelona" is just not right. Scheduling is messed up due to ATP shenanigans and that is not Nadal's fault, so he should not be forced to skip Barcelona.
10 characters

superman1
05-07-2008, 04:51 PM
Yes very bitter screwing up the schedule like they did. :mad: I don't mind more grass events if it replaces hard court events but clay is the best part of the year. I find the hard court season the most boring. Ball bashers,no patience, and lack of constructing points type players paradise.

You're a borderline troll, dude. Every one of your posts is completely predictable. If Nadal starts doing poorly on grass and great on hard courts, you'll immediately change your mind.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 04:55 PM
You're a borderline troll, dude. Every one of your posts is completely predictable. If Nadal starts doing poorly on grass and great on hard courts, you'll immediately change your mind.
Hard courts are rough on the joints. Grass is probably the easiest surface on the joints. I wouldn't change my mind on grass and hardcourts because it would prolong players careers more. Of course Nadal will get the benefits to his joints as well. ;)

drakulie
05-07-2008, 05:01 PM
^^Nadal suffered a blister (LOL) injury>>> not a joint injury.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 05:04 PM
^^Nadal suffered a blister (LOL) injury>>> not a joint injury.
Yeah well I wasn't talking about now. I was talking about down the line with all the tournaments Nadal will be playing on hard courts. Patellar tendinitis and his foot problems are the most notable effects from hard courts. I just think they need to replace them with grass court tournaments.

Defcon
05-07-2008, 05:06 PM
HC is also a surface which exposes a typical clay court player's weaknesses. Now Nadal is not a typical anything so he can adapt, but he's still far from a favorite on a hardcourt. Wimbledon is playing more and more like clay as far as I can tell, its even slower than USO, which accounts for his good results.

I would like surfaces which are fair to all playing styles, which I guess is plexicushion. But then we'd lose the variety that makes the game fun.

drakulie
05-07-2008, 05:07 PM
Yeah well I wasn't talking about now. I was talking about down the line with all the tournaments Nadal will be playing on hard courts. Patellar tendinitis and his foot problems are the most notable effects from hard courts. I just think they need to replace them with grass court tournaments.

Nadal has those problems, becuase like every other recent clay court specialist before him>>> they play too much and don't manage their schedules well.

Like I said, he needs to manage his schedule better, and definitely needs to drop the doubles. Nadal is a hard-head in this area, and has consistently kept playing, even when he is injured. He never gives his body time to heal properly.

Morrissey
05-07-2008, 05:09 PM
Yeah, it has everything to do with appeasing US television coverage during hardcourt season. So yeah, it had nothing to do with clay season since they just simply neglected it. Even though, Americans don't give a sh1t about tennis and the ratings show it. Maybe the ATP should put more of their attention to Europe since it's most popular there.

Morrissey
05-07-2008, 05:10 PM
Nadal has those problems, becuase like every other recent clay court specialist before him>>> they play too much and don't manage their schedules well.

Like I said, he needs to manage his schedule better, and definitely needs to drop the doubles. Nadal is a hard-head in this area, and has consistently kept playing, even when he is injured. He never gives his body time to heal properly.

he only played doubles in MC. He didn't play dubs in Barcelona, or here.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 05:11 PM
HC is also a surface which exposes a typical clay court player's weaknesses. Now Nadal is not a typical anything so he can adapt, but he's still far from a favorite on a hardcourt. Wimbledon is playing more and more like clay as far as I can tell, its even slower than USO, which accounts for his good results.

I would like surfaces which are fair to all playing styles, which I guess is plexicushion. But then we'd lose the variety that makes the game fun.
I see Wimbledon as the most fair surface to players styles right now. Neither the Europeans (for the most part) nor the Americans grew up on this surface and the surface has slowed down. Plexicushion is pretty quick and low bouncing so I don't see how that is a neutral surface.

drakulie
05-07-2008, 05:13 PM
he only played doubles in MC. He didn't play dubs in Barcelona, or here.

Well, he played doubles in Miami.

Again, Nadal needs to give his body time to heal properly. Skipping one of these events will not kill him, but continuing the pace he is going at will only lead to more severe injuries.

Defcon
05-07-2008, 05:17 PM
Plexicushion is pretty quick and low bouncing so I don't see how that is a neutral surface.

I don't remember the name then, there was some surface which was supposedly a lot softer than HC, not as slow as clay and easy to deploy. But expensive.

Nadal_Freak
05-07-2008, 05:18 PM
I don't remember the name then, there was some surface which was supposedly a lot softer than HC, not as slow as clay and easy to deploy. But expensive.
Rebound Ace? That was closer to fair but still the predictable bounces and good traction favor a hardcourt players style.

Vision84
05-07-2008, 05:31 PM
They should have a indoor carpet season with a slam on carpet. Then Nadal can't complain about blisters or other problems.

superstition
05-07-2008, 06:15 PM
The Australian Open used to be played on grass. I saw a match between Evert and Navratilova on the Tennis Channel from 82. There used to be many more grass tournaments. Hard court tournaments were less common in the pro circuit.

illkhiboy
05-08-2008, 07:45 AM
That's not true. Designate one of them a Masters, or put up a few mill, or both, and people would play.



Err, the only comment on venues in this thread was the SIZE, not that there are no venues or interested parties.

Designate a masters, even after Wimbledon, and say that it must be on grass... and just WATCH the bids roll in, especially from India, Dubai and China. A new masters? Wham, there'd be bids left, right and centre.



The only 'link' is simply that people are whinging on and on about the clay schedule, which seems fairly hypocritical given the complete lack of a grass court schedule at all.

It's like complaining about losing a dollar coin on the same day you found a $100 note.

Well the people complaining about the clay season this year are right - Miami shouldn't have been pushed because of College Football (though some doubt that was the reason).

I do agree that the grass season is really short. And playing a grass court event after Wimbledon is not a big deal since IW/Miami are held after the Australian and we all know they are huge events. However the problem might be in squeezing another Masters between Wimbledon and Canada/Cincinatti. The stretch from the clay season til' Wimbledon is pretty brutal on players' bodies (MC, Rome, Hamburg, RG, one grass tune-up, Wimbledon in 11 weeks). Players tend to use that time to recuperate. Though plenty of European players who lose early at Wimbledon start off playing in Bstaad or Stuttgart.

There is also Davis Cup which starts about 10 days after Wimbledon. And the North American summer swing begins in July. Tournaments like Indianapolis and Washington would be against a grass court AMS between Davis Cup and Canada. I 'm guessing the USTA wouldn't support a mandatory grass event either.

coloskier
05-08-2008, 07:53 AM
Hard courts are rough on the joints. Grass is probably the easiest surface on the joints. I wouldn't change my mind on grass and hardcourts because it would prolong players careers more. Of course Nadal will get the benefits to his joints as well. ;)

Then why is it that it is usually the clay court players that get hurt, and not the hard court players? Clay is initially less hard to the joints, if the points only last 4-5 strokes. But if they started having 15-20 strokes, clay is much harder on you than any other surface. Even all the players in interviews say that clay courts are harder on your body than any other surface, for no other reason than the points last too long.

coloskier
05-08-2008, 07:54 AM
The Australian Open used to be played on grass. I saw a match between Evert and Navratilova on the Tennis Channel from 82. There used to be many more grass tournaments. Hard court tournaments were less common in the pro circuit.

In fact, it used to be 3 grass court and one clay court slam. USO, AO, and Wimbledon were all played on grass.

West Coast Ace
05-08-2008, 10:42 AM
Only one who screwed up anything was Nadal not managing his schedule better, and also playing doubles in many events. He also needs to go to a local drug store, get better cushions for his feet, so he doesn't get blisters and go crying about the schedule.Play the Hingis card: Sue Nike! :)

Agree - playing doubles - even though they won - was ridiculous. I respect him but he should get a Darwin Award for that - after his rant about the schedule.

I'll throw this in - as I always do: the top players need to practice smarter, not longer. It's not just matches that take their toll. I bet in some practices they hit more balls than in the match. I know I do.



http://www.angrybackhand.com

joeri888
05-08-2008, 12:09 PM
but the fact that neither RG nor Wimbledon want to move.


Come to western Europe in September-April, and you'll see what rains REALLY like.. Not just that bit that's annoying during wimbledon already.

Nadal_Freak
05-08-2008, 12:17 PM
Then why is it that it is usually the clay court players that get hurt, and not the hard court players? Clay is initially less hard to the joints, if the points only last 4-5 strokes. But if they started having 15-20 strokes, clay is much harder on you than any other surface. Even all the players in interviews say that clay courts are harder on your body than any other surface, for no other reason than the points last too long.
BS. They say clay is easier on the body. Clay is soft and therefore easier on the body. It maybe more tiring but it isn't rougher on the body. Clay courters get hurt the most when having to adjust to the hard courts. Running way behind on the baseline and sliding on hard courts is very bad for you.

dh003i
05-08-2008, 12:30 PM
Who's fault is it that clay-courters slide on HC? Why the heck are they doing that? And who's fault is it that they place way behind the baseline?

Although I tend to like grass, then clay, the best as surfaces.

Nadal_Freak
05-08-2008, 12:32 PM
Who's fault is it that clay-courters slide on HC? Why the heck are they doing that? And who's fault is it that they place way behind the baseline?

Although I tend to like grass, then clay, the best as surfaces.
It's a hard habit to break. They grew up on clay so they play what is comfortable to them. Unfortunately, what is comfortable to them on clay is what hurts them on hardcourts. Hard to make all the adjustments.

drakulie
05-08-2008, 02:08 PM
BS. They say clay is easier on the body. Clay is soft and therefore easier on the body. It maybe more tiring but it isn't rougher on the body. Clay courters get hurt the most when having to adjust to the hard courts. Running way behind on the baseline and sliding on hard courts is very bad for you.

It is obvious you have never played on clay.

Although **initially** clay is easier on the body, in the long run >> it is not. This is because points last way longer on clay, especially if you are playing with someone with equal playing skills. Most pros agree the hardest Slam to win is the French, and this is because the points are brutal. A point that may be over in 4-5 shots on hard, could last 30+ shots on clay. This is called wear and tear, which is why clay court specialist usually aren't around too long.

r2473
05-08-2008, 02:27 PM
...and everything to do with an absence of grass tournaments!

It's ridiculous to hear all of this whinging about there being too many clay tournaments with not enough gap between them, when the grass season is non existent.

Clay GS: 1 == Grass GS: 0
Clay Masters: 3 >> Grass Masters: 0
Clay regular tournaments: LOADS >>>>>>>>> Grass Regular: none.

Why couldn't Halle or Queens or even wimbledon be played on grass? Why couldn't the grass season continue after the 90's?

Before anyone whinges about a bit of a tight clay schedule, could we please whinge about a non-existent grass schedule?

I fixed the post :)

There are no grass court tournaments. Period.

West Coast Ace
05-08-2008, 05:00 PM
The Australian Open used to be played on grass. I saw a match between Evert and Navratilova on the Tennis Channel from 82. There used to be many more grass tournaments. Hard court tournaments were less common in the pro circuit.So what? The players back then didn't hit the ball with the power they do today. Didn't use extreme grips - Sania Mirza's wrist would have given out regardless of the playing surface. Weren't chasing the cash like today's players. Evert managed her schedule. She didn't play every week like Jankovic.

The grass courts aren't coming back - WAY too expensive to maintain - give it up. Find another windmill to fight...

coloskier
05-08-2008, 05:21 PM
BS. They say clay is easier on the body. Clay is soft and therefore easier on the body. It maybe more tiring but it isn't rougher on the body. Clay courters get hurt the most when having to adjust to the hard courts. Running way behind on the baseline and sliding on hard courts is very bad for you.

Didn't Nadal just get hurt on a clay court? And, just like hard court players have to adjust to learn to slide on clay, clay courters have to learn not to slide on hard courts. You have to adjust to the surface. The problem is that clay courters play the same game on every surface. I guess that hard courters do too, but it is much less hard on their bodies because of the style of play. It is the style of play that causes more injuries than anything. Please tell me if there is anything you do not agree with in this statement, because I believe that the facts speak for themselves. The players with the most injuries have always been clay courters because of their style of play. Muster, Borg, Nadal, Chang, all the top clay courters have always had injury problems.

CyBorg
05-08-2008, 06:24 PM
The players with the most injuries have always been clay courters because of their style of play. Muster, Borg, Nadal, Chang, all the top clay courters have always had injury problems.

Yes, because of their style of play. Not because of anything inherent with the surface.

Chang was not a clay courter. Borg didn't have injury problems. Muster was in a car accident and actually had a long career. Weak examples.

coloskier
05-08-2008, 06:35 PM
Yes, because of their style of play. Not because of anything inherent with the surface.

Chang was not a clay courter. Borg didn't have injury problems. Muster was in a car accident and actually had a long career. Weak examples.

Yes, that was what I was trying to say (even with the bad examples). Baseliners, just by the style of play tend to get injured sooner because the points last longer. Of course, you can look at Dent, who was just the opposite, with his bad back.

Casey10s
05-08-2008, 06:59 PM
I think they should pile up all the hard court tournaments into 1 month. See how the hard court specialists would think about that. Weak thread comparing clay to grass. Grass should be replacing hard court events.

Excuse me, but there is a bunch of hard court tournaments that are scheduled in a short time period, from the last part of July to the first part of September (probably about 6 weeks). Most years, you have the Toronto and Cincinnati Masters in successive weeks followed by 1 or 2 weeks of other tournaments and then the U.S. Open. I haven't heard of too many players complaining about that schedule (except for maybe this year with the Olympics). Typically (not including last year) you see the Europeans taking their time to make it into the U.S. There have been some years you don't see all the top ranked players in Canada but they will show up in Cincinnati. The clay courters stay in Europe to play the smaller clay court tournaments instead of playing the hard courts in the U.S.

I agree with the other posters that Nadal has to manage his schedule better. As stated elsewhere, he believe the best way to maximize his points is to play all tournaments where Federer picks and chooses his tournaments to not overextend himself.

I would rather see fewer clay court tournaments and more hard and grass court tournaments. Personally, I get so bored watching clay court matches.

CyBorg
05-08-2008, 08:44 PM
Baseliners, just by the style of play tend to get injured sooner because the points last longer.

Are you sure?

coloskier
05-09-2008, 09:25 AM
Are you sure?

The statistics seem to point to this assumption. You don't see Karlovic, Roddick, Blake, and Federer get injured nearly as often as Nadal, Moya, Ferrer, Davydenko, and Djokovic. Which group tends to play longer points?