Originally Posted by kiki
Sorry but Dallas had 3 OUT OF 5 from the very first round.And it was a KO event, not a round robin event like Masters ( with all that tanking and arrangements)
To win the Masters you have to play five matches, to win the WCT Finals you have to play three.
You just have to see the most important event, and since the Masters was played in New York its prestige esponentially increased year after year.
Go and watch the 1986 Masters final between Lendl and Becker.
If the fourth tournament was the WCT Finals (won by Jarryd) like you are saying, the Masters wouldn't have be so important to decide the world no. 1, because Lendl would have overtaken Becker anyway (RG&USO against WIM).
On the contrary, if the Masters was the fourth tournament (and it was, because the commentators clearly said "this is a sort of Slam"
), a Becker victory would have created a draw situation (RG&USO against WIM&Masters) and Becker would have been the world no. 1 thanks to the head-to-head score (4-1): this was what all the commentators were saying.
(I don't agree with that, because even counting the Masters as a Major in 1986, and even presupposing a Beck victory, it would have been 2 Majors each, but Lendl had a stronger season overall. Nonetheless, this anecdote demonstrates without any kind of doubt which tournament was seen as most important).
In my opinion there is no way to consider the WCT Finals more than the 5th tournament of the year after 1977.
Wembley was just about the only tournament of significance in 1952, 1953, 1956, so of course it had to be important in those years.
Starting in 1957, with a strong contingent of players, Forest Hills, Roland Garros, Kooyong, White City easily surpassed it.
Several of the Wembley finals were decided by the buildup of heavy smoke, which caused the players to develop exhaustion due to lack of oxygen (especially 1952, 1962, 1964, 1967).
The Pro Majors weren't always played where you are saying: the French Pro was played at RG only until 1962. The Australian Pro had no less than four different locations.
Sorry, but I'm convinced that your avversion to this tournament has not real motivations. Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall both consider it a great tournament, so excuse me if I give more credit to their opinions, as they were there and playing. ;P