Am confused about the mandatory tournaments

[jukka1970]

I thought that all 4 slams (each worth 2000), and now the 9 Masters (each worth 1000) are mandatory. And since Monte Carlo is a masters worth 1000, I thought it was mandatory, and was one of the reasons I was surprised not to see Federer there. However in a different post about Nadal and his scheduling it was said that Monte Carlo wasn't mandatory.

Does anyone know why? or did the plan of last year making the 9 master tournaments mandatory fall through?

Jukka

 

[clayman2000]

All of the Masters except Monte Carlo are mandatory. MC isnt because it was originally going to be demoted to a 500, but after some second thought, because of its past, they kept it a Masters, but made it non-mandatory so that guys could have a slower transition from hard to clay

 

[MisterP]

Old thread, but I searched and couldn't find anything about the "mandatory-ness" of "premier mandatory" events. What happens if a seeded player declines to play a mandatory event? I know they can always come up with some injury to get out of playing. But, what are the actual consequences of refusing to play, and has anyone ever done that?

 

[octobrina10]

Old thread, but I searched and couldn't find anything about the "mandatory-ness" of "premier mandatory" events. What happens if a seeded player declines to play a mandatory event? I know they can always come up with some injury to get out of playing. But, what are the actual consequences of refusing to play, and has anyone ever done that?

Answers:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Corporate/Rulebook.aspx

 

[MisterP]

Answers:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Corporate/Rulebook.aspx

Yeah, not interested in reading thru 11 different PDFs to find the answer. If you don't know, then that's fine.

 

[Red Rick]

Old thread, but I searched and couldn't find anything about the "mandatory-ness" of "premier mandatory" events. What happens if a seeded player declines to play a mandatory event? I know they can always come up with some injury to get out of playing. But, what are the actual consequences of refusing to play, and has anyone ever done that?

I'm not entirely sure, but they will get 0 points for that tournament, and can't replace that result with a result from a lower tournament. That and if they skip without reason when they have to play, I think they may get a fine, but I don't know about that.

There's three different criteria which allow a player to skip a masters 1000 without repercussion
more than 600 match wins
12 years on Tour
30 years or older

All of the Big 4 will qualify for all criteria come May, so if they choose to they only have to play 5 out of 9 Masters 1000.

 

[octobrina10]

I'm not entirely sure, but they will get 0 points for that tournament, and can't replace that result with a result from a lower tournament. That and if they skip without reason when they have to play, I think they may get a fine, but I don't know about that.

There's three different criteria which allow a player to skip a masters 1000 without repercussion
more than 600 match wins
12 years on Tour
30 years or older

All of the Big 4 will qualify for all criteria come May, so if they choose to they only have to play 5 out of 9 Masters 1000.

Nope! The Rulebook, page 13 says:
1.08 Reduction of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Commitment
A. A player’s number of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment tournaments shall be reduced by one (1) tournament for reaching each of the following milestones:
1) 600 matches* (as of 1 January of the commitment year);
2) 12 years of service;
3) 30 years of age (as of 1 January of the commitment year).