ATP Finals and WTA Championships

[IlliniSky]

How big is the ATP World Tour Finals and the WTA Tour Championships? I've heard some people call it the "Fifth Major" while others don't consider it more than an exhibition.

The players who do win it seem to really cherish what they accomplished but has anyone ever read or heard the players say it is as important as a Grand Slam tournament?

In 1988, Steffi Graf won the "Golden Slam" by winning all four major titles plus the Olympic Gold Medal in Seoul. However, she was beaten in the semifinals by Pam Shriver. For some, this tarnished her dream year just a tad.

Some people consider it a big deal and some don't give it more than a passing thought. What's your take on these year-ending championships?

 

[batz]

In terms of points and £s on offer, it's second only to the slams - way bigger than any MS.

But in terms of kudos, I'm really not sure. I actually think it's a relatively easy tournament to win compared to a regular MS because you can lose but still win it.

 

[powerangle]

Less than a Grand Slam by far, but a bit more than a Masters 1000 tournament (we're talking relative prestige and "big title" factor).

So none of your poll options, imo.
It's more than "just another tournament" but not quite on Grand Slam level...

 

[IlliniSky]

For me, it's always been one of the major tournaments. How often do we get to see the top eight make it to the quarters and battle it out? Of course there's always the fitness factor. Players that are fit are fine, but players like Nadal who seem to always break down at the end of the year really struggle with it. The fact that players like Sampras, Lendl, and Federer won this tournament numerous times tells you they had something special that a lot of players do not. But that's part of the game too. This tournament shows not only who has the most skill or ability, but also who has the strongest body that is capable to going through whole year without getting injured.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

In terms of points and £s on offer, it's second only to the slams - way bigger than any MS.

But in terms of kudos, I'm really not sure. I actually think it's a relatively easy tournament to win compared to a regular MS because you can lose but still win it.

but to turn is another way... so can your opponents: beating a guy doesn't guarantee to definitely get rid of him !

For me, it's always been one of the major tournaments. How often do we get to see the top eight make it to the quarters and battle it out? Of course there's always the fitness factor. Players that are fit are fine, but players like Nadal who seem to always break down at the end of the year really struggle with it. The fact that players like Sampras, Lendl, and Federer won this tournament numerous times tells you they had something special that a lot of players do not. But that's part of the game too. This tournament shows not only who has the most skill or ability, but also who has the strongest body that is capable to going through whole year without getting injured.

excellent post... the 9 straight finals of lendl at the year-end masters are really a very impressive record.
... and by the way roger still has to catch sampras and lendl, with their 5 titles... this is another significant record he doesn't have... (yet ?)



Nb: bring back the best-of-5 final, PLEASE !!!

 

[MarcusInKensington]

I was at the o2 last year, and was really impressed by the tournament, but I can't help feeling that most of the players would rather have been on a beach somewhere.

The trouble is that it's at the very end of a really tough season, and most of the players are exhausted...hence the number of withdrawals over the years.

I feel it would improve greatly as a spectacle if the ATP moved it from November to January. The eligible players would benefit from the rest, and would be a great incentive to start the next year quickly, instead of dragging themselves through one more tourney before they go on holiday.

In golf, the first tournament of the year is for top performers in the previous year, so I see no reason why tennis can't be the same.

 

[Rippy]

Very limited poll options...

I think it's less important than slams, but more than "just another tournament".

 

[samjones]

Speaking only to the Men's YEC - I don't really follow the women's game.

Because the points earned are over and above the Best of 18 and because you have to be in the top 8 (or 7) to qualify then I would consider it to be extremely important points-wise.

I'm not sure that there's an analog between YEC and a slam or a Masters.

 

[Mustard]

The YEC is the fifth biggest tournament of the year.

 

[powerangle]

The YEC is the fifth biggest tournament of the year.

Agree that it's the 5th biggest following the 4 slams. In that vein, it definitely is one of the biggest tournaments of the year. Nice culminating effort against top players.

I'll choose the first option, since I feel the YEC/WTF is closer to the slam level than 'just another tournament'.

 

[Destro]

Masters events are more important, and better to watch. YEC can come ahed of the 500's.

 

[Mustard]

Masters events are more important, and better to watch. YEC can come ahed of the 500's.

If a player wins all their matches at the YEC, he gets 1,500 points. That's 500 points more than winning a masters series event.

 

[Destro]

If a player wins all their matches at the YEC, he gets 1,500 points. That's 500 points more than winning a masters series event.

Yes, I am well aware of that. YEC is nothing more than a glorified exhibition.

 

[TMF]

In terms of points and £s on offer, it's second only to the slams - way bigger than any MS.

But in terms of kudos, I'm really not sure. I actually think it's a relatively easy tournament to win compared to a regular MS because you can lose but still win it.

I disagree. It's possible to win a MS without facing any top 10 players throughout the tournament. But the YEC consists the top 8 players, every match is tough.

 

[batz]

I disagree. It's possible to win a MS without facing any top 10 players throughout the tournament. But the YEC consists the top 8 players, every match is tough.

Possible, but improbable - but fair enough mate, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

[Richards19]

I disagree. It's possible to win a MS without facing any top 10 players throughout the tournament. But the YEC consists the top 8 players, every match is tough.

Sometimes, it dosn't even matter. Just to see Nadal last year... :-?

 

[cknobman]

YEC needs some credit. Its the only tournament on tour where every single match you play is against a top 8 player, every other tournament you can win potentially without even having to play a top 10 player.

I give it much much more than a MS but a little less than a GS.

 

[rovex]

Maybe because it's at the end of the year no one really cares and so people don't class it that high in terms of prestige. I sure think it's an underated event.

 

[OKUSA]

You have to beat 4 top 8 players (you could move to the semi's with just 1 win in group stage) to win the tournament, which is harder than any other tournament except majors.

 

[samjones]

YEC needs some credit. Its the only tournament on tour where every single match you play is against a top 8 player, every other tournament you can win potentially without even having to play a top 10 player.

The USO winner will go to YEC regardless of what his rank is (assuming Federer doesn't have some major meltdown.)