Grass court Masters - good or bad idea?

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

Kind of thought for a moment about how all 9 Masters look like. 6 of them are hard court, from which 2 are indoors, 4 outdoors; and the remaining 3 are on clay.
Would an addition of a grass court Masters (being a 10th Masters or replacing one hard court Masters with it) be a nice new "invention" in tennis? There is Queens, played just before Wimbledon, the most prestigious tennis tournament, and is in the same city too. Maybe it would be nice to see it upgraded into a 1000 event.

 

[tacou]

I say yes. But really, is queens going to get a Better field with an upgrade? I think the recent upgrades to the grass season are a great start.

 

[gn]

Yes. It is sad that tour favors HC and Clay specialist but not the Grass.

 

[Dave1982]

Queens is the logical choice should the ATP go down the path of establishing a M1000 event on Grass. Issue being however that because there is such little gap between FO and W it would be difficult to ensure commitment from all players to contest the event....I think if they did make Queens the 10th M1000 tournament it would be similar to MC where it is considered an optional event as opposed to the others which are compulsory.

Biggest problem the ATP would have is that if Queens (or any other new tournament that week) became a M1000 it would essentially wipe out Halle and the M250's on either side....and also The Boodles would suffer massively.

For those reasons I can't see it happening anytime soon unless they push Wimbledon back a week or bring FO forward a week (both extremely unlikley).

 

[Gazelle]

Bring on grass masters.

 

[timnz]

Kind of thought for a moment about how all 9 Masters look like. 6 of them are hard court, from which 2 are indoors, 4 outdoors; and the remaining 3 are on clay.
Would an addition of a grass court Masters (being a 10th Masters or replacing one hard court Masters with it) be a nice new "invention" in tennis? There is Queens, played just before Wimbledon, the most prestigious tennis tournament, and is in the same city too. Maybe it would be nice to see it upgraded into a 1000 event.

If there is a grass court masters - it should replace a clay court masters. There is far far too much slow court tennis. My preference would have been the following:

There should always only be 9 Masters 1000's - for history's sake. Get rid of Madrid as it is the least historically prestigious Masters 1000 or make Madrid a grass court event. If you get rid of Madrid create either a 'US Grass Court Championship Masters 1000 somewhere on the US east coast (so it is not a long way away from Wimbledon), or re-make Hamburg a Masters 1000 (as they have a infrastructure in place) - converting its clay court to a grass court. (My only issue with Hamburg is that they have gone and made Stuttgart a 250 - we would end up with 3 German Grass court events).

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

If there is a grass court masters - it should replace a clay court masters. There is far far too much slow court tennis. My preference would have been the following:

There should always only be 9 Masters 1000's - for history's sake. Get rid of Madrid as it is the least historically prestigious Masters 1000 or make Madrid a grass court event. If you get rid of Madrid create either a 'US Grass Court Championship Masters 1000 somewhere on the US east coast (so it is not a long way away from Wimbledon), or re-make Hamburg a Masters 1000 (as they have a infrastructure in place) - converting its clay court to a grass court. (My only issue with Hamburg is that they have gone and made Stuttgart a 250 - we would end up with 3 German Grass court events).

Well, a grass court Masters replacing any of the 9 current Masters we have would speed up the tennis. Replacing a HC makes more sense to me because they are dominating, 6/9. Lets say fast Cincy; and indoors Shanghai and Paris should not be touched, there are still IW, Miami and Toronto/Montreal. Erasing one of those in favor of Queens would do no big harm, I think that tennis should not be played too much in America anyway. The behavior of the US crowd just confirms why I think that.
5 HC - 3 clay - 1 grass seems more balanced than 6 HC - 2 clay - 1 grass to me.

 

[Numero Uno]

Queens is the logical choice should the ATP go down the path of establishing a M1000 event on Grass. Issue being however that because there is such little gap between FO and W it would be difficult to ensure commitment from all players to contest the event....I think if they did make Queens the 10th M1000 tournament it would be similar to MC where it is considered an optional event as opposed to the others which are compulsory.

Biggest problem the ATP would have is that if Queens (or any other new tournament that week) became a M1000 it would essentially wipe out Halle and the M250's on either side....and also The Boodles would suffer massively.

For those reasons I can't see it happening anytime soon unless they push Wimbledon back a week or bring FO forward a week (both extremely unlikley).

They can move queens after Wimbledon, there is lots of free time until american season

 

[SoBad]

As long as the British taxpayers support the museum expansion project at the grassroots level, I see no problem with the proposed grasscourt/indoor exhibition circuit amplification initiative.

 

[Cenarius]

They can move queens after Wimbledon, there is lots of free time until american season

+1 Agree

 

[tacou]

Why would any top player contest a grass tournament after Wimbledon ? They are resting/transitioning to hard court.

 

[Dave1982]

They can move queens after Wimbledon, there is lots of free time until american season

Totally agree but in reality Grass Court tournaments for the most part are about preparing for Wimbledon, or at least they are for the top players...of course Newport comes after Wimbledon and there are few Clay Court tournaments after the FO but non of which are M1000's.

As much as I'd love to see a M1000 on grass I just think it would be impossible to schedule one between FO and Wimbledon and after Wimbledon players are keen for rest due to having had to play a heavy schedule from start of Clay court season through to end of Wimbledon.

 

[adil1972]

not enough gap between french open and wimbledon to host master event

the finalist of french iopen will tank the master event to save energy for wimbledom

LOL

 

[ibbi]

Of couuuuuuuuurse there should be. Ideally there should be two, two on grass, two on clay, two indoor hard, three outdoor hard. Something like that. Put another extra week between Roland Garros and Wimbledon, and the two middle weeks would be the perfect weeks for them, give them to Halle, and Rosmalen, I'd say. Queens is great and all, but no way the city of London should have two such major tournaments in such quick succession.

 

[SpinToWin]

I actually would remove Paris... Seriously.

 

[vanioMan]

Remove Paris and add a Grass Masters.

 

[tennis_pro]

We've had this discussion a million times already. Yes we want a grass MS but no we won't get it.

/thread

 

[Mainad]

Why remove any at all? Why not upgrade Queens and Halle to Masters status and make them back to back events? Or if that's too tricky, just make them alternate Masters events

Is there any law that says there can only be 9 Masters tournaments?

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

We've had this discussions a million times already. Yes we want a grass MS but no we won't get it.

/thread

Sorry, but at least for a month I have been here, there was not a single thread about grass Masters.
But I can understand the frustration about "How many Slams will Djoko win" types of threads. They are repetitive.

 

[RF-18]

Definitely a good idea. IT has to happen

 

[Anaconda]

I say yes. But really, is queens going to get a Better field with an upgrade? I think the recent upgrades to the grass season are a great start.

If they made Queens a mandatory 1000 event, Federer would have no choice but to play the event. Federer really is the only player of note who I can remember not ever attending Queens.

 

[RF-18]

Sorry, but at least for a month I have been here, there was not a single thread about grass Masters.
But I can understand the frustration about "How many Slams will Djoko win" types of threads. They are repetitive.

Too hard on the schedule as Wimbledon is around the corner.

 

[RSH]

Sorry, but at least for a month I have been here, there was not a single thread about grass Masters.
But I can understand the frustration about "How many Slams will Djoko win" types of threads. They are repetitive.

tennis_pro is right; the discussion has been held several times before you've been here. Anyways, yes of course there should be at least 2 grass masters, but how would one re-organize the tour in order to make room for one? It most likely won't happen.

 

[-Bobo-]

The whole structure of the season is a bit meh, as is the surface distribution. I thought about it a while ago, and if you wanted to make it good for more styles of play and fair distribution it would make more sense to have 2 hard, 2 grass, 2 clay, 2 fast HC (id prefer carpet but doubt you'd ever get a grand slam to use it for the surface). I think ideally it would be :

2 Clay masters then FO
2 HC masters then AO
2 GC Masters then wimb
2 Fast HC masters then US open (would be cool to see carpet for this part so that you could see how it would work with the modern game etc, but never going to happen and it could be terrible.)
YEC rotates surface, maybe even up for vote.

Each surface gets a 2 month block, with the masters being at the start of each month and GS end of second month.

The idea here is you ramp up the speed of the surface as the season goes. I think it would be better if the bigger tournaments were less spaced out too maybe across 8-10 months so there is some actual off season. That way the grinders can play year round to grind out a living, while the top guys can work on things etc.

There are obvious problems though in terms of time of the year you would play somewhere, resurfacing, reordering etc, but i do think it would make for a better season. Not to mention in this scenario top players would only play 13 tournaments a year, maybe 16ish if you count things like dubai etc.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

tennis_pro is right; the discussion has been held several times before you've been here. Anyways, yes of course there should be at least 2 grass masters, but how would one re-organize the tour in order to make room for one? It most likely won't happen.

I believe both of you, just saying that I was not aware of that.
The grass court Masters will not happen, but messing with the tennis schedule and structure as well as predicting futures of players can be interesting.

 

[tacou]

If they made Queens a mandatory 1000 event, Federer would have no choice but to play the event. Federer really is the only player of note who I can remember not ever attending Queens.

You are correct yes. But if that were the case, as others have pointed out, it wouldn't simply mean Queens is worth 1000 points; it would necessitate a complete redesign of the grass season to allow Halle and the other 250 grass events to survive.

I'd like to see a grass masters but not at the expense of 3-4 other grass tourneys, and so my point was both Queens and Halle already have pretty elite draws.

If the majors weren't all so stubborn you could easily add 2-3 weeks to the grass season which would allow the schedule to get a lot more creative.

 

[Gary Duane]

Why would any top player contest a grass tournament after Wimbledon ? They are resting/transitioning to hard court.

Exactly.

 

[Dave1982]

Why remove any at all? Why not upgrade Queens and Halle to Masters status and make them back to back events? Or if that's too tricky, just make them alternate Masters events

Is there any law that says there can only be 9 Masters tournaments?

Of course there's no "law" that says there can only be 9...the ATP determines and has the ultimate power over it's own tour....therefore it can elevate a tournaments status, downgrade it or introduce a new one as they see fit....naturally it's not quite that simplistic as each tournament would have a contract with the ATP so such moves could only be made when contracts are re-negotiated or significant pay outs by the ATP would be required.

Even with that said though, the players through the ATP Players Association would never approve an additional M1000 tournament....and they certainly wouldn't approve a compulsory M1000 tournament between FO & Wimbledon.

I also don't think players would be that keen on a M1000 grass court tournament that wasn't designed to provide preparation for Wimbledon....not b/c they don't love grass court tennis it's just when could it realistically be played. Shanghai and Paris have to be indoors due to weather in Northern Hemisphere at that time of year. I agree that Madrid is probably the most precariously placed of all the M1000 tournaments (even though MC isn't a mandatory status) but even then I can't see players wanting to jump between Clay and Grass and then back to Clay when they are preparing for FO.

Best bet would realistically be for one of IW or Miami to be moved to grass....will never happen though.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Good idea.

That'd mean Roger would win another MS title every year until he calls it quits (Djoko seems to avoid grass warmups before Wimbledon).

 

[Mainad]

Of course there's no "law" that says there can only be 9...the ATP determines and has the ultimate power over it's own tour....therefore it can elevate a tournaments status, downgrade it or introduce a new one as they see fit....naturally it's not quite that simplistic as each tournament would have a contract with the ATP so such moves could only be made when contracts are re-negotiated or significant pay outs by the ATP would be required.

I think Halle and Queens make enough money to justify the upgrade.

Even with that said though, the players through the ATP Players Association would never approve an additional M1000 tournament....and they certainly wouldn't approve a compulsory M1000 tournament between FO & Wimbledon.

Why not? Almost all of them already play either Queens or Halle anyway!

I also don't think players would be that keen on a M1000 grass court tournament that wasn't designed to provide preparation for Wimbledon....not b/c they don't love grass court tennis it's just when could it realistically be played.

Admittedly, Wimbledon would have to agree to move back another week if they are to be played back to back a la IW/Miami or Canada/Cincinnati but if they were to remain alternates (Queens or Halle) then they could stay in their present spot ie. 2 weeks before Wimbledon.

Shanghai and Paris have to be indoors due to weather in Northern Hemisphere at that time of year. I agree that Madrid is probably the most precariously placed of all the M1000 tournaments (even though MC isn't a mandatory status) but even then I can't see players wanting to jump between Clay and Grass and then back to Clay when they are preparing for FO.

I don't think anybody would consider slotting a grass Masters in ahead of the FO. That is the clay season. The grass season always starts after the FO and before Wimbledon. Shanghai is an outdoors tournament by the way.

Best bet would realistically be for one of IW or Miami to be moved to grass....will never happen though.

They will never move to grass. Realistically, it can only be Queens or Halle.

 

[timnz]

They will never move to grass. Realistically, it can only be Queens or Halle.

It is not that easy to put on a Masters 1000. 250 events (Queens and Halle have only been upgraded to 500's this year) aren't necessarily geared up to host a 1000.

My view is the Grass Masters 1000 should be 1 of:

1/ Put Madrid into grass - and move it to after the French Open

or

2/ Downgrade Madrid to a 500, upgrade Hamburg to a 1000 again and convert to grass (they have experience being a Masters 1000 event) - move the event between FO and Wimbledon

or

2/ Downgrade Madrid to a 500, Create a brand new Masters 1000 event on the east coast of the US called the 'US Grass Court Championships'.

I am a firm believer that there should only be 9 Masters 1000 events a year - so that present players can be compared to past players on an even playing field (at least back to the mid-80's Super 9).

 

[Dave1982]

Why not? Almost all of them already play either Queens or Halle anyway!

Yes many do, however with each being a M500 they are considered optional tournaments and dare I say many of the top players who do compete at them are paid an appearance fee or would be doing so to satisfy their own personal sponsors. If either became a M1000 (especially a mandatory one) then all that goes out the window and I can't imagine the Players Association being overly enthusiastic about that when they are already calling for a shorter and less taxing season as is.

Admittedly, Wimbledon would have to agree to move back another week if they are to be played back to back a la IW/Miami or Canada/Cincinnati but if they were to remain alternates (Queens or Halle) then they could stay in their present spot ie. 2 weeks before Wimbledon.

No way that either Halle or Queens would be satisfied with being played in alternative years even if they were to be upgraded to M1000 status. Additionally if Wimbledon did agree to be moved back a week (again can't imagine this happening) can you imagine the uproar if one get's upgraded and the other doesn't...upgrading one would essentially mean the other has to move it's date and in doing so would kill it off because players would be forced to play the M1000 and wouldn't be keen to then back up and play a 500 the following week....except Ferrer...he would try to play both even if they were held in the same week.

Shanghai is an outdoors tournament by the way.

Fair point but main stadium does have a roof so cover is there if required and from memory quite a few matches do end up being played "indoors"...technically you are right though and it is absolutely listed as an outdoor hardcourt tournament.

 

[Dave1982]

You are correct yes. But if that were the case, as others have pointed out, it wouldn't simply mean Queens is worth 1000 points; it would necessitate a complete redesign of the grass season to allow Halle and the other 250 grass events to survive.

I'd like to see a grass masters but not at the expense of 3-4 other grass tourneys, and so my point was both Queens and Halle already have pretty elite draws.

If the majors weren't all so stubborn you could easily add 2-3 weeks to the grass season which would allow the schedule to get a lot more creative.

Exactly....the only way we will ever see a Grass Court M1000 is if there is a greater gap created between FO and Wimbledon. A Grass Court M1000 will not be created at the expense of other existing Grass Court tournaments and it would be highly unlikely to see one created outside of what is typically considered the "Grass court season".

Don't get me wrong I'd absolutely love to see a grass court M1000 tournament but in order for it to be achieved it would take a significant redesign of the existing calendar. The most likley scenario would see the Clay court season bought forward by at least 2-3 weeks and either Madrid or MC being downgraded, Halle & Queens would remain on same week and as 500's a brand new M1000 would then be played the following week with then a weeks break before Wimbledon. As much as I like the idea of it being played on the US East Coast, in reality and to try and cause as little disturbance to Halle and Queens as possible it would probably have to be played in Europe somewhere.....someone mentioned Hamburg, that could be the solution.

 

[timnz]

Exactly....the only way we will ever see a Grass Court M1000 is if there is a greater gap created between FO and Wimbledon. A Grass Court M1000 will not be created at the expense of other existing Grass Court tournaments and it would be highly unlikely to see one created outside of what is typically considered the "Grass court season".

Don't get me wrong I'd absolutely love to see a grass court M1000 tournament but in order for it to be achieved it would take a significant redesign of the existing calendar. The most likley scenario would see the Clay court season bought forward by at least 2-3 weeks and either Madrid or MC being downgraded, Halle & Queens would remain on same week and as 500's a brand new M1000 would then be played the following week with then a weeks break before Wimbledon. As much as I like the idea of it being played on the US East Coast, in reality and to try and cause as little disturbance to Halle and Queens as possible it would probably have to be played in Europe somewhere.....someone mentioned Hamburg, that could be the solution.

We just need the FO organizers to have the FO just one week earlier. That will create a 4 week window between the end of the FO and beginning of Wimbledon - more than enough time for a Masters 1000, and only a 1 week distruption to the clay season.

 

[Dave1982]

We just need the FO organizers to have the FO just one week earlier. That will create a 4 week window between the end of the FO and beginning of Wimbledon - more than enough time for a Masters 1000, and only a 1 week distruption to the clay season.

That's possible but I still think any creation of a M1000 tournament in that gap would severely hurt both Halle/Queens as you'd either be playing the M1000 the week before each of them or you'd push them forward and play the M1000 where they currently sit. You need to have the week before Wimbledon clear as to allow the players a week to train at Wimbledon.

Obviously pushing FO forward a week would then mean shifting whole clay season forward a week as you'd also want to maintain the week prior to FO free also...this is where it becomes an issue as that stretch throughout the season is arguably already the most draining with 3 x M1000's and 2 x Slams (+ any 250/500's they might play) so again you'd need to probably drop MC (or Madrid and move MC into it's place before Rome) for the Players Association to approve such a change.

 

[user]

Paris already has a GS, so it would make sense to downgrade Paris Masters to a 500 event, and upgrade Halle to M1000 status. One M1000 tournament before WTF is enough.

 

[Max G.]

Masters 1000s need to be sufficiently large, and I think Queens especially just doesn't have the physical space to expand and admit more spectators.

Queens and Halle would each be very pissed off if the other got to be a Masters, when the two have historically been of equal value. But to make them BOTH masters would require putting them on different weeks, and would suddenly mess with a lot of players' schedules since usually players only play one. There isn't much space between RG and W to play two masters events!

Fundamentally, it could only happen if RG and W moved further apart (probably not just by one week, but by several) and the schedule for the rest of the year were rearranged to suit that. This would probably mean cutting out a week of the US hardcourt season (atlanta or washington?) and probably eliminating one of the claycourt masters' series tournaments...

It becomes a huge headache to do all this. I mean, not to say it's not possible; schedules have gotten rearranged before. But the ATP would have to see a big demand for it from the fans or players or sponsors. I'm not sure that's there.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

It would be great! I keep great memories of the Olympics 2012 played on grass.

 

[dlk]

I would love to see a grass 1000. It would create more versatility & turn the pendulum more for the grass players, who have much less tourneys to showcase their wares.

 

[Mainad]

Yes many do, however with each being a M500 they are considered optional tournaments and dare I say many of the top players who do compete at them are paid an appearance fee or would be doing so to satisfy their own personal sponsors. If either became a M1000 (especially a mandatory one) then all that goes out the window and I can't imagine the Players Association being overly enthusiastic about that when they are already calling for a shorter and less taxing season as is.

Maybe. I do wonder how Djokovic would react to either or both of them becoming Masters. He would now have to play them again if if he wants to complete a Career Golden Masters! I wonder if that would be sufficient incentive for him?

No way that either Halle or Queens would be satisfied with being played in alternative years even if they were to be upgraded to M1000 status. Additionally if Wimbledon did agree to be moved back a week (again can't imagine this happening) can you imagine the uproar if one get's upgraded and the other doesn't...upgrading one would essentially mean the other has to move it's date and in doing so would kill it off because players would be forced to play the M1000 and wouldn't be keen to then back up and play a 500 the following week....except Ferrer...he would try to play both even if they were held in the same week.

By alternative, I meant that both would be played in the same week and players would have the choice of playing either. I think even Ferrer would find that one a bit tricky!

 

[Krish872007]

My proposed schedule:

Sydney (January)
Australian Open (February)
Indian Wells (March)
Monte Carlo (April)
Rome (May)
French Open (May-June)
Queen's (June)
Halle (June-July)
Wimbledon (mid-end July)
Toronto (August)
Cincinnati (end August)
US Open (mid-September)
Shanghai (October)
World Tour Finals (November)

 

[Dave1982]

Maybe. I do wonder how Djokovic would react to either or both of them becoming Masters. He would now have to play them again if if he wants to complete a Career Golden Masters! I wonder if that would be sufficient incentive for him?

Well in hypothetical terms if either tournament was to become a M1000 then ALL players would have to play (assuming it's a mandatory M1000) so I think avoiding the wrath of the ATP would provide him & others with more than enough of an incentive to play.
Djokovic typically plays The Boodles through that period so this would be another exhibition tournament you could probably kiss goodbye to if a M1000 was created in that period.

 

[veroniquem]

Excellent idea. We need a master on every surface. We have too many hard court masters anyway.

 

[dlk]

My proposed schedule:

Sydney (January)
Australian Open (February)
Indian Wells (March)
Monte Carlo (April)
Rome (May)
French Open (May-June)
Queen's (June)
Halle (June-July)
Wimbledon (mid-end July)
Toronto (August)
Cincinnati (end August)
US Open (mid-September)
Shanghai (October)
World Tour Finals (November)

I like it, but seek a well-rounded ten Masters, so lets do another, Moscow after Shanghai.

 

[MichaelNadal]

It'll happen in our lifetime.