Keys isn't allowed to play a WTA 250 because only 1 top 10 player is allowed to play in WTA 250 (Pegula in already)

V

vokazu

Legend
Didn't know this new WTA rule.

7news.com.au

Madison Keys forced out immediately after winning Aus Open title

The new world No.7’s first grand slam triumph has come at a cost.
7news.com.au 7news.com.au

Australian Open champion Madison Keys forced out of ATX Open immediately after grand slam win​

The new world No.7’s first grand slam triumph has come at a cost.

Australian Open champion Madison Keys has been forced out of an upcoming tournament immediately after — and as a result of — her first ever grand slam triumph.

The 29-year-old enjoyed a successful start to her 2025 season, taking out the title in Adelaide before lifting the trophy in Melbourne.

But her rise from 21st in the rankings at the turn of the year to the new world No.7 has come at a cost due to a specific WTA rule around top-10 players.

Keys is no longer permitted to compete in the ATX Open in Austin, Texas at the end of February because world No.6 and fellow American Jessica Pegula is already locked into the draw.

WTA rules do not allow 250-level tournaments — the smallest events on the elite tour — to host two players who are ranked inside the top 10, unless one is the defending champion.

The rule was implemented to spread talent across the multiple tournaments that take place each week.

Keys has had three stints inside the top 10 in her career but had spent almost all of the past three years ranked between 11th and 25th.

ATX Open organisers said they had come to an agreement with Keys last year when she was ranked 21st.
 
I've been wondering about some ITF rules/regulations for a while; some new ones are added to the agreements every January. ATP and WTA have some differences and I don't think this 250 rule is applied in men's tennis.
vokazu said:
The rule was implemented to spread talent across the multiple tournaments that take place each week.
Click to expand...
I think the WTA is forcing players to participate in WTA 500 tournaments. The regulation for WTA 250s is just another control attempt. Tennis, whether it is professional or junior, has been managed by total freaks lately.
 
Dumb rule, but no doubt Keys will adjust. I really feel sorry for the tournament organizers. Showcasing a newly minted, American Grand Slam tournament winner at an event in the U.S. -- what a windfall for them! But then, "Not so fast!" says the oafish WTA.

And needless to say, preventing a U.S. star from playing in the U.S. is just mind-bogglingly stupid. "We can't have women's tennis building a fan base! What will the neighbors think?!"

The rule is also counterproductive because a degree of competition between and among sanctioned events is necessary for them to improve. Denying top players the ability to play where they prefer just disguises the flaws in the less-desired tournaments.
 
I assume that means the WTA will find her a place in the San Diego draw?

If not that is some serious bulltwaddle
 
Cashman said:
I assume that means the WTA will find her a place in the San Diego draw?

If not that is some serious bulltwaddle
Click to expand...
The 500 the same week as Austin is in Mexico. Then Indian Wells the following week. Guess she will have more time off than expected. I don't think the WTA really thought this through, most events get players commitments months in advance and of course rankings can change a lot in that time. Tournament directors are getting screwed.
 
Must have been a really slow day at the office for the tennis news media and TTW posters.

Think about it for a moment.
Keys just took home a check for more than $2.1 million U.S. for winning the 2025 A.O.

And now because her WTA ranking is in the top 10 she can no longer
participate in a rinky dink tournament that is paying the winner $33,200 U.S.

Let that sink in for a moment and then tell us how outraged you are and you think
Madison will be. :)
 
I will defend this policy. It gives lower ranked players a chance to make some money, and get some points. But more so the money. They are trying to support the lower ranked players. I have no problem with it.
 
insideguy said:
I guess I will be the contrarian on this one. I got no problem with this rule.
Click to expand...
insideguy said:
I will defend this policy. It gives lower ranked players a chance to make some money, and get some points. But more so the money. They are trying to support the lower ranked players. I have no problem with it.
Click to expand...
You can "guess" and "defend" what your views are but I don't suppose you have to plan your tournaments, work with sponsors, fight for and protect your ranking points, do you?
 
Mark-Touch said:
Must have been a really slow day at the office for the tennis news media and TTW posters.

Think about it for a moment.
Keys just took home a check for more than $2.1 million U.S. for winning the 2025 A.O.

And now because her WTA ranking is in the top 10 she can no longer
participate in a rinky dink tournament that is paying the winner $33,200 U.S.

Let that sink in for a moment and then tell us how outraged you are and you think
Madison will be. :)
Click to expand...
As I explained clearly above, the problem here is not any damage to Keys but rather to this specific tournament and to women's tennis in general.
 
JMR said:
Dumb rule, but no doubt Keys will adjust. I really feel sorry for the tournament organizers. Showcasing a newly minted, American Grand Slam tournament winner at an event in the U.S. -- what a windfall for them! But then, "Not so fast!" says the oafish WTA.

And needless to say, preventing a U.S. star from playing in the U.S. is just mind-bogglingly stupid. "We can't have women's tennis building a fan base! What will the neighbors think?!"

The rule is also counterproductive because a degree of competition between and among sanctioned events is necessary for them to improve. Denying top players the ability to play where they prefer just disguises the flaws in the less-desired tournaments.
Click to expand...
Has Keys spoken out about this ?
If not you're just second-guessing her.
Maybe her whole tennis perspective and priorities have changed radically since her slam win.

Maybe she will just want to participate in WTA500+ events?
 
While this rule certainly supports lower ranked players, is it not hurting these smaller tournaments? I'm not sure how popular Austin is, but how often have we seen empty stands on our screens lately... Madison would have been a huge selling point.
 
Last edited:
Jonesy said:
This looks like a rule created by Ruud & Rublev.
Click to expand...
It’s actually officially referred to as the Thiem Rule. Only one vulture per WTA 250.

giphy.gif

giphy.gif
 
insideguy said:
No I understand your side. I dont agree with it. The tour is attempting to support its lower ranked players. But its a good debate.
Click to expand...
One thing you are right about is that the topic is open to discussions.

Now, those lame strives of the tennis body lack sense and equality. In Futures for example, the limiting of higher ranked ATP/WTA players to participate is justifiable. 250s and 500s in ATP/WTA are like M15s/M25s in Futures. The fickle tennis powers irrationally adjust rules/regulations as they cannot see the necessity for equality and common sense which throws of tennis players of all ages. Female tennis players start up earlier than males more often and they burn earlier too. This notion could give you that feeling that WTA 250s restriction to one top ten player only is justifiable but it really isn't. There's a higher turnover at the top of women's tennis than the men's tennis. It's more difficult for male ATP players to rise up in their rankings which is why, in theory, ATP restrictions in 250s for top ten players would be more acceptable.

Having said that, however, tampering with 250s/500s is ridiculous in either females of males category for they are the set of pro tournaments as the mentioned Futures M15s/M25s or the Challengers are for that matter. It's about ONE STEP, TWO STEPS to get one higher for all the talented and skillful hard working players regardless of gender. Do you really think that female pro tennis players at the lower rankings struggle more than males? Or, do you think that there's a larger gap in between the top female players vs the lower ranked ones than there is in the male category? Me think the latter is what it is. Would you say that that is the very reason to assist the weak female tennis players to be awarded higher number of points and more money in WTA 250s? Do you wish so much to pull up the mountain some lowly female tennis player that'll embarrass the sport? Women have already been given an advantage over men in Futures where they don't have to pay for their accommodation while men do. Should we truly prop up women's tennis and variety of female competitors for the beauty on the courts, in front of cameras and for the sponsorships and sales of the female tennis products? But haven't we recently had the movement for equality in men's and women's tennis? Haven't we fought for the fairness in the sport?
 
Last edited:
IMO, the sentiment of the rule is fine but should be tweaked so the rule applies to the player at the time they’re registered for the tournament not the fluctuations between the registration and tournament start. In this case especially, I feel they‘ll probably lose some ticket sales from the lay-fan.

Even me, who lives here in Austin and was looking forward to going with my wife (also a fan) am reconsidering snagging main draw tickets in favor of qualifying instead. Maybe there’s enough fans that it won‘t affect ticket sales, but surely sponsors would be willing to pony up last minute for it.

Jonesy said:
This looks like a rule created by Ruud & Rublev.
Click to expand...
This cracked me up lmao
 
austintennis2005 said:
I don’t get the joke
Why would rublev and Ruud like the rule?
Click to expand...
Because of Rublev’s 16 titles I think 9 are 250‘s and he can’t make it past a GS quarterfinal. Ruud’s similar but I can’t remember the proportion. So they’re sandbagging to win titles/points at lower tournaments. This rule basically keeps other top players from entering so they’re more likely to win the tournament.
 
JMR said:
As I explained clearly above, the problem here is not any damage to Keys but rather to this specific tournament and to women's tennis in general.
Click to expand...
Probably need some actual evidence that it is damaging to these tournaments. I mean speculation isnt evidence. I understand many points here. But all people are doing is saying omg this will hurt these smaller tournaments without any actual attendance figures to compare prior.


I will give you a real world example how this has affected tickets prices and fans. A few years back Nadal committed to playing in Washington ( last minute). My brother wanted to go to Washington to watch some tennis. Well since Nadal was suppose to appear the ticket prices went through the roof. He was pissed. Nadal ended up playing one match and then dropping out. But just him possibly showing jacked up the prices on both the regular and secondary markets. Pricing many fans out of the tournament who just wanted to go watch some tennis.

So as with everything it's not all black and white.
 
Last edited:
I feel bad for Pegula. The Austin tournament basically threw her under the bus in favor of Keys, the new "it" player on tour.
 
insideguy said:
Probably need some actual evidence that it is damaging to these tournaments. I mean speculation isnt evidence. I understand many points here. But all people are doing is saying omg this will hurt these smaller tournaments without any actual attendance figures to compare prior.
Click to expand...
Why do you think tournaments lose money? Isn't it 'evidence ' that they not only lack the support of sponsors but also fans?
insideguy said:
I will give you a real world example how this has affected tickets prices and fans. A few years back Nadal committed to playing in Washington ( last minute). My brother wanted to go to Washington to watch some tennis. Well since Nadal was suppose to appear the ticket prices went through the roof. He was pissed. Nadal ended up playing one match and then dropping out. But just him possibly showing jacked up the prices on both the regular and secondary markets. Pricing many fans out of the tournament who just wanted to go watch some tennis.
Click to expand...
Do you really think WTA ticket prices will be 'jacked up' for Keys or any other top female competitor the way as in ATP when top players show up?

Seriously, can't you see that ATP 250s/500s and WTA 250s/500s are a set of pro tournaments that reasonably and legally ought not to be restricted to only lower ranked players that have their Challengers to play?
 
TennisBro said:
Why do you think tournaments lose money? Isn't it 'evidence ' that they not only lack the support of sponsors but also fans?

Do you really think WTA ticket prices will be 'jacked up' for Keys or any other top female competitor the way as in ATP when top players show up?

Seriously, can't you see that ATP 250s/500s and WTA 250s/500s are a set of pro tournaments that reasonably and legally ought not to be restricted to only lower ranked players that have their Challengers to play?
Click to expand...
Well first off are you implying these tournaments lose money because they cant have Keys now? Or were they losing money prior to this new rule? So why would Keys help them make money?

And second of all the idea behind this is to get these other players who are having a hard time making a living on tour to make one.
 
Let's just put it this way.
I'm sure Keys won't be losing any sleep about this decision not to allow her to play.

Now if they do it again next year when she is out begging on the streets in dire need of spare cash,
that would be a different story.
 
insideguy said:
Well first off are you implying these tournaments lose money because they cant have Keys now? Or were they losing money prior to this new rule? So why would Keys help them make money?
Click to expand...
I'd say players may get paid by sponsors who may sponsor tournaments. If a top sponsor's player doesn't play, the tournament may not get the sponsorship. Hm, I guess I am 'implying'.
insideguy said:
And second of all the idea behind this is to get these other players who are having a hard time making a living on tour to make one.
Click to expand...
Like I said, there are Challengers for weaker players. That's 'the idea' in pro tennis. STEP ONE, STEP TWO 15s, 25s in Futures, Challengers are the second platform and the WTA 250s, 500s are the third one. 'Living on tour' is like on sort of PLATFORMS that are on different levels. 250s and 500s are for top pro players. Taking the top ten out of 250s and 500s will probably keep the prize money at the lower level too. The ones that are having a hard time living on a tour are the ones below the 250th ranking spot as they don't get the 300 000 dollar paycheck from tennis org.
 
TennisBro said:
I'd say players may get paid by sponsors who may sponsor tournaments. If a top sponsor's player doesn't play, the tournament may not get the sponsorship. Hm, I guess I am 'implying'.

Like I said, there are Challengers for weaker players. That's 'the idea' in pro tennis. STEP ONE, STEP TWO 15s, 25s in Futures, Challengers are the second platform and the WTA 250s, 500s are the third one. 'Living on tour' is like on sort of PLATFORMS that are on different levels. 250s and 500s are for top pro players. Taking the top ten out of 250s and 500s will probably keep the prize money at the lower level too. The ones that are having a hard time living on a tour are the ones below the 250th ranking spot as they don't get the 300 000 dollar paycheck from tennis org.
Click to expand...
Id say you honestly dont know. And id say it's just speculation.

250s and 500s move all the time. Heck even masters have. Your ideas on what makes these tours money or what's best for the tours are not relevant. They really aint.

You dont know anything about the finances and what goes on. So my position is this is what's best for the lowner ranked players. Sorry.
 
insideguy said:
Id say you honestly dont know. And id say it's just speculation.
Click to expand...
Sure you can bring your doubts into discussions as you are allowed to.
insideguy said:
250s and 500s move all the time. Heck even masters have. Your ideas on what makes these tours money or what's best for the tours are not relevant. They really aint.
Click to expand...
Sure my 'ideas' are 'not relevant' but your 'speculations' are to be counted in. Readers need to know that.
insideguy said:
You dont know anything about the finances and what goes on. So my position is this is what's best for the lowner ranked players. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Sure I 'don't know anything about the finances and what goes on' so your 'position' on the topic is what readers need to know about.

What is inside the guy has come out as the truth. This debate's best for lowly WTA players and posters with knowledge like insideguy (s)
 
insideguy said:
Probably need some actual evidence that it is damaging to these tournaments. I mean speculation isnt evidence. I understand many points here. But all people are doing is saying omg this will hurt these smaller tournaments without any actual attendance figures to compare prior.
Click to expand...
Since no one here is privy to the tournament's or tour's finances, the best available indicator of a negative impact is probably the public statements of the tournament directors. These comments have been somewhat guarded, since it would be highly awkward for them to come out and scream that the WTA is moronic, but the ones I have read evince (a) major disappointment at the loss of Keys, (b) the forlorn wish that the rule were different, and (c) a resigned concession that they are stuck with the rule as it is.

Also, ticket sales are not the only factor to be considered. Slam-related PR impacts are always desirable, and can help build an event's rep for the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Break To Win
Why is Jessica Pegula so good?
Replies
8
Views
1K
DutchUncle
DutchUncle
ghostofMecir
Did Madison Keys just win the “closest” slam?
Replies
12
Views
580
Moose Malloy
M
1
American teenagers in the top 150s WTA
Replies
23
Views
5K
Chemist
C
Aussie Darcy
  • Poll Poll
Is it fair for a player to keep points from the previous years tournament if they play and lose early this year? E.G. Madison Keys
Replies
6
Views
442
Deleted member 735320
D
Enceladus
2023 WTA Tour - gallery, interesting facts, review
Replies
7
Views
700
Enceladus
Enceladus
Back
Top