A week off between Masters 1000

#1
With the withdrawal of Nadal from Cincinnati because he went far in Canada...

And with Federer skipping Canada in order to avoid playing it back to back with Cincinnati...

Isn’t it a good idea that there should be a minimum of one week off between m1000 tournaments?

Right now these huge tournaments are played back to back

Indian Wells/Miami
Madrid/Rome
Canada/Cincinnati

It doesn’t make sense. That’s why many players get tired, injured or sometimes decide to withdraw out of fear of overplaying...
 
#3
Yes Masters are the biggest ATP Tourneys and should be played as major events with delay between them. The clay season probably has one too many Masters events.

IW could become 128 field and have 2 week schedule and 1500pt.
There are definitely some changes to schedule ranking points that could help top level tennis.

This is only an issue with top players as lower rank only play 1 or 2 rounds and get the break.
 

StANDAA

Hall of Fame
#4
12 years ago we had all Masters 1000’s finals Bo5, no week off before Wimbledon and shorter holidays after Masters Cup and we still had less injured players and less withdrawals than today..

12 years ago prime Fedal were dominating playing a full schedule and now their grandpas in tennis terms each playing half a schedule and they’re still 1&2 in the world LOL
 
Last edited:
#5
With the withdrawal of Nadal from Cincinnati because he went far in Canada...

And with Federer skipping Canada in order to avoid playing it back to back with Cincinnati...

Isn’t it a good idea that there should be a minimum of one week off between m1000 tournaments?

Right now these huge tournaments are played back to back

Indian Wells/Miami
Madrid/Rome
Canada/Cincinnati

It doesn’t make sense. That’s why many players get tired, injured or sometimes decide to withdraw out of fear of overplaying...
I don't think that Indian Wells/Miami needs to be changed, because with the byes, the finalists will almost certainly get a minimum of four days off in between. But definitely agree that the others should not be back to back. And a change is so easy:

1. Clay court season: Monte Carlo - Barcelona - Madrid - Estoril/Munich/Istanbul - Rome [makes geographic as well as temporal sense to have Barcelona and Madrid in back-to-back weeks]
2. Summer hard court season: Atlanta - Canada - Washington - Cincinnati

+ with weeks off in between events, it makes it easier for the final to go back to being best of five.
 
#7
Federer and Nadal played Masters in consecutive weeks for about 30 years between them. No need to change the format because at the tail end of their careers they're playing more selectively.
 
#8
In all honesty the rest of the guys on tour are the reason these guys can pick and choose what they want to play and when the want to play it. They put very little pressure on Nadal or Fed to play when the whole rest of the mens tour can't catch them playing full time.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
#9
I support the idea of a week's rest between Masters 1000s. They're so hectic that if players go deep in the first one they can't give their best in the second. Hence the many withdrawals and retirements and early losses at one or the other and it's not fair on the tournaments that they get caught up this way. Time for the ATP to wise up and do the necessary to protect these showcase events of their's.
 
#12
Maybe we should implement the SE bye rules for the finalist and whoever the #8 gets would play in first round replaced by opponent who was supposed to play a match against the finalist. That way, he deserved a bye first round. #8 is not guaranteed to have a first round bye, if you need a bye, you must get to #6 ranked to get a guaranteed bye.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
#13
Not only did players of the past have to play best of 5 set finals, but most Masters 1000 didn't even have a 1st rd bye for the top players.
In the early days, Federer and Nadal won their M1000 titles playing 6 out of 7 days in a week. Top players of this era have it much easier now.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
#15
With the withdrawal of Nadal from Cincinnati because he went far in Canada...

And with Federer skipping Canada in order to avoid playing it back to back with Cincinnati...

Isn’t it a good idea that there should be a minimum of one week off between m1000 tournaments?

Right now these huge tournaments are played back to back

Indian Wells/Miami
Madrid/Rome
Canada/Cincinnati

It doesn’t make sense. That’s why many players get tired, injured or sometimes decide to withdraw out of fear of overplaying...
Anything to give this era's Tommy Haas an edge huh?
 
#16
I support the idea of a week's rest between Masters 1000s. They're so hectic that if players go deep in the first one they can't give their best in the second. Hence the many withdrawals and retirements and early losses at one or the other and it's not fair on the tournaments that they get caught up this way. Time for the ATP to wise up and do the necessary to protect these showcase events of their's.
In particular Canada and Cincinnati need a split but it's nearly impossible now that Wimbledon was moved back a week. The transition to HC from grass is pretty tough on the body to play 5 matches (six if no bye) in less than a week and have just a couple days off to travel and reset hundreds of miles away.

Look at the carnage to the draw in Cincinnati last year...four LLs into main draw and two of them the really lucky variety that got 1R byes.
 

ibbi

Hall of Fame
#17
Ideally, yes, but this has never been a problem before. If you put a week between IW and Miami, Madrid and Rome, Canada and Cincy, that's going to be 3 more weeks off that they lose from probably their summer break. It's an issue that's only becoming problematic now because the top players in the world are all into their 30s.

The 20-somethings should be the top players, should be going deep week in and week out like these guys used to, and seeing the likes of Federer and Nadal at this point should be a novelty.

It's not them that's the problem, they're acting as players their age should be. It's the lack of people stepping up to replace them that is making this so noticeable.
 
#19
Yes Masters are the biggest ATP Tourneys and should be played as major events with delay between them. The clay season probably has one too many Masters events.

IW could become 128 field and have 2 week schedule and 1500pt.
There are definitely some changes to schedule ranking points that could help top level tennis.

This is only an issue with top players as lower rank only play 1 or 2 rounds and get the break.
I agree with you that there should be a gap between the M1000 tournaments but I don't agree that clay has too many M1000 events - it has 3 and hard courts have 6. If anything needs to be cut back it is the number of hard courts. Having said that, I think we could play:

Last week in January: IW
Second week in February: Miami
First two weeks in March: AO
April: Monte Carlo & Madrid (one week between)
May: Roland Garros
June: Grass Masters
July: Wimbledon
August: Canada & Cincy (one week between)
September: US Open
October: Shanghai & WTF (one week apart)
 
#20
I agree with you that there should be a gap between the M1000 tournaments but I don't agree that clay has too many M1000 events - it has 3 and hard courts have 6. If anything needs to be cut back it is the number of hard courts. Having said that, I think we could play:

Last week in January: IW
Second week in February: Miami
First two weeks in March: AO
April: Monte Carlo & Madrid (one week between)
May: Roland Garros
June: Grass Masters
July: Wimbledon
August: Canada & Cincy (one week between)
September: US Open
October: Shanghai & WTF (one week apart)
Fair enough, more correct to say there are too many clay Masters in a short time period before a Major. Clay season has 3 over short period there are 2 HC sessions.
AO should be played later in the year There is no sensible reason why it's play when it is
The local argument is that it falls on school holidays is a bit disengenous given I've been to it many times and it's full of drunken adults. Maybe the first few days have lots of kids but by Thurs they're out numbered by drunks. The AO could do with better warm-up event and better milder weather Or one round ,2nd, played completely under lights. Either outside at night or under roof during day. To make it fairer and give players super Weds/Thurs night. The WTA could wear fluorescent knickers to cover they're screams. Cheap drinks. Great night.
 
#21
Many of you hit on the scheduling problems, but I will provide my take. Yes, this is mostly an issue because the megastars of the tour are still the same guys who were the megastars for the last decade to 15 years. Federer and Nadal simply have no need to expend vital energy trying to win tournaments (even Masters events) that are not Grand Slams or that may not provide them with the optimal preparation for the next Slam. Throw in Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, Wawrinka and others who have dealt with significant injuries in recent years and you've got the majority of the biggest fan draws having to think extra carefully about when and where they play. I warned people several years ago that the very thing that is happening now would be happening with regularity. The extra week between the French and Wimbledon was long argued for. Without a doubt, it was needed. The problem is that it makes the summer hard court lead-up to the U.S. Open even more crammed. Sure, if a player enters both Canada and Cincinnati and only wins a round or two in each event, that player won't be overly taxed heading into the final Grand Slam of the season. However, the best players of the past decade plus expect to (and typically do) go deep in the majority of tournaments they participate in. With the U.S. Open being the ultimate goal, these veteran top players who have won just about everything there is to win have no interest in trying to win 10 matches in 14 days in the heat and humidity, get just one week off and then go to New York with the prospect of trying to win seven best of five set matches in 14 days. It makes absolutely no sense in the grand scheme of things.

In this way, I believe the tour has a bit of an issue. The schedule in the '90s-early '00s made more sense. Although Canada and Cincinnati were still back to back, there were two full weeks between the end of Cincy and the start of the Open. While that cannot happen anymore with the Wimbledon pushback, I concur with the suggestion that Canada and Washington D.C. should switch places on the schedule. The D.C. event, which isn't in all that strong of a position now, wouldn't seem to stand to lose all that much by being in between the two Masters events rather than directly before them. Some quality players would obviously still show up. The risk for Montreal/Toronto would be that the top players may not want to come to North America so early. Then again, I feel like there would be a far greater chance that a Federer or Nadal would give much more serious thought to playing both Masters events than they do right now. As it stands now, the tour is asking players to essentially play at their best against top competition four out of five weeks in the heat and humidity of August/September. For those that are either up there in age, and/or have dealt with major injuries, and/or do not need to assume any risk, this schedule is simply not reasonable.
 
Top