Masters 1000 importance.

Gary20

Gary20

Banned
How would you rank the Masters 1000 in terms of importance? There is an obvious difference in prestige between them and i think it is as follows.

1. Indian Wells
2. Rome
3. Miami
4. Canadian Open
5. Shanghai
6. Madrid
7. Cincinatti
8. Paris
9. Monte Carlo
 
Gary20 said:
How would you rank the Masters 1000 in terms of importance? There is an obvious difference in prestige between them and i think it is as follows.

1. Indian Wells
2. Rome
3. Miami
4. Canadian Open
5. Shanghai
6. Madrid
7. Cincinatti
8. Paris
9. Monte Carlo
Click to expand...
I sort of agree with your list. Who has the most top 3 in prestige titles?
 
Anyone who puts Monte Carlo in last place probably puts Borg at #50 on an ATG list.

Get a clue.

And this list was generated quite obviously by someone who has never been to any of these venues. Why not ask people who have actually attended these tournaments? Do a "search" and see a recent thread about this very topic.
 
1. Rome - Always was always will be.

Equal
* Monte Carlo - For prestige
* IW - For money (this used to have a bigger purse than Major in the 80's.
* Cin - It's the USO swing always draws big field/

next bunch
* Miami
* Paris - Swinging back to Europe this time of year is weird, then would be ok if was carpet or wood, but basically a HC indoor?
* Canadian
* Shanghai - Probably because the seasons over after USO.

9. Madrid - Should drop it too many Clay Masters in same region and time.

Of note - Queens. It can never be a Masters but has a history that rivals most of these Tourneys.
 
xFedal said:
I sort of agree with your list. Who has the most top 3 in prestige titles?
Click to expand...
Nadal does but he has never won Miami. Djokovic has all three so to be consistent even though he has less than Rafa, he gets the kudos for having all three.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Anyone who puts Monte Carlo in last place probably puts Borg at #50 on an ATG list.

Get a clue.

And this list was generated quite obviously by someone who has never been to any of these venues. Why not ask people who have actually attended these tournaments? Do a "search" and see a recent thread about this very topic.
Click to expand...
If you read my posts you would know i place Borg 3rd on ATG list!!!!!
 
PMChambers said:
1. Rome - Always was always will be.

Equal
* Monte Carlo - For prestige
* IW - For money (this used to have a bigger purse than Major in the 80's.
* Cin - It's the USO swing always draws big field/

next bunch
* Miami
* Paris - Swinging back to Europe this time of year is weird, then would be ok if was carpet or wood, but basically a HC indoor?
* Canadian
* Shanghai - Probably because the seasons over after USO.

9. Madrid - Should drop it too many Clay Masters in same region and time.

Of note - Queens. It can never be a Masters but has a history that rivals most of these Tourneys.
Click to expand...
Is Monte Carlo prestigious? Isnt that the tournament that isnt compulsory to attend? I would drop MC not Madrid as Madrid is fan friendly and modern. Rome v IW is interesting.

Interesting you put Cinci ahead of Miami.
 
What makes one tournament important over the others? Money, Ranking, Confidence? The year end is important for the money. It is also very motivating to the top 8 to make it there, since it is a prestigious year end award, and they feel honored just making it into the club.

Other than that, it doesn't play a role in anything IMO
 
PMChambers said:
1. Rome - Always was always will be.

Equal
* Monte Carlo - For prestige
* IW - For money (this used to have a bigger purse than Major in the 80's.
* Cin - It's the USO swing always draws big field/

next bunch
* Miami
* Paris - Swinging back to Europe this time of year is weird, then would be ok if was carpet or wood, but basically a HC indoor?
* Canadian
* Shanghai - Probably because the seasons over after USO.

9. Madrid - Should drop it too many Clay Masters in same region and time.

Of note - Queens. It can never be a Masters but has a history that rivals most of these Tourneys.
Click to expand...
Queens should replace Cincinatti as a Masters 1000 for me.
 
1. Indian Wells
2. Rome
3. Miami
4.Monte Carlo
5. Madrid
6. Cincinatti
7. Shanghai
8.Canadian Open
9. Paris

My humble subjective opinion, will not discuss it :p
 
Honestly it always seems that Cincy, Rome and Indian Wells generate the most hype. Miami always seems to be bagged on for being outdated and way behind Indian Wells lately. Again, just a humble opinion, most seem to be pretty even. Maybe Shanghai and Paris people are a little less interested because they are at the end of the season after the slams are over.
 
1. IW
2. Rome
3. Cincy
4. Canada
5. Shanghai
6. MC
7. Dubai
8. Paris
9. Madrid
 
OP - Cincy has always been one of the most prestigious.
It started in 1899, too.
 
mavsman149 said:
I'm assuming we'd like to call Basel and Halle Masters as well as Dubai? ;)
Click to expand...
I wish.

Dubai has as much competition as MC, and due to it being HC (where most players are more competitive) I'd actually say it's the superior tournament.
 
Firstservingman said:
I wish.

Dubai has as much competition as MC, and due to it being HC (where most players are more competitive) I'd actually say it's the superior tournament.
Click to expand...

MC is still the better draw, 20th ranked Goffin was the 8th seed at Dubai this year, Monte Carlos 16th seed was 20th ranked Tommy Robredo. Dubai and even Basel to a lesser extent get the best draws for 500 level events.
 
Indian Wells (largest attendance outside Slams - 96 players, also first M1000 & fair break b/w AO & IW so feeling starved of top tennis)
Rome (history, prize money, easily most prestigious of Clay Masters)
Miami (used to be up there but fallen, high attendance & 96 player draw)
Cincinnati (history, well supported, final hit out before USO)
Canada (only just behind Cinccy, the fact Fed skips it says to me it falls just behind )
Shanghai (growing in popularity, some of best facilities)
Monte Carlo (if it was compulsory it would be a LOT higher - that backdrop!!)
Paris (really hard to get excited about - indoors & most top players seem to have lost interest or focus on WTF)
Madrid (Blue clay to satisfy a sponsor - enough said)
 
Dave1982 said:
Indian Wells (largest attendance outside Slams - 96 players, also first M1000 & fair break b/w AO & IW so feeling starved of top tennis)
Rome (history, prize money, easily most prestigious of Clay Masters)
Miami (used to be up there but fallen, high attendance & 96 player draw)
Cincinnati (history, well supported, final hit out before USO)
Canada (only just behind Cinccy, the fact Fed skips it says to me it falls just behind )
Shanghai (growing in popularity, some of best facilities)
Monte Carlo (if it was compulsory it would be a LOT higher - that backdrop!!)
Paris (really hard to get excited about - indoors & most top players seem to have lost interest or focus on WTF)
Madrid (Blue clay to satisfy a sponsor - enough said)
Click to expand...
This.
Can't fault this list at all.

I'm only kidding about Miami lol. :)
 
Gary20 said:
How would you rank the Masters 1000 in terms of importance? There is an obvious difference in prestige between them and i think it is as follows.

1. Indian Wells
2. Rome
3. Miami
4. Canadian Open
5. Shanghai
6. Madrid
7. Cincinatti
8. Paris
9. Monte Carlo
Click to expand...

Gray20, Good Ranking.

My ranking...
1. Indian Wells
2. Rome-Miami-Canadian Open-Cincinnati
6. Shanghai
7. Monte Carlo
8. Bercy

Madrid is a Master500 ....
 
Last edited:
Gary20 said:
How would you rank the Masters 1000 in terms of importance? There is an obvious difference in prestige between them and i think it is as follows.

1. Indian Wells
2. Rome
3. Miami
4. Canadian Open
5. Shanghai
6. Madrid
7. Cincinatti
8. Paris
9. Monte Carlo
Click to expand...
To me history counts over money when it comes to prestige. Hence my list is :

1. Monte Carlo (the fact that it is not compulsory is irrelevant to its historical significance. Wilding over 100 year ago was winning muti Monte Carlo's
2. Rome - similar reasons to Monte Carlo
3. Indian wells (I would have said Miami a few years ago...but I do agree that Miami's star has faded compared to Indian wells. I am also not fond of hard court events that try to compete with clay for slowness)
4. Cincinatti - medium court speed is slow refreshing compared to the dominance of slow court events)
5. Miami - for historical reasons - it was considered the 5 th slam in the late 80s. In fact there was a time that all rounds were best of 5 sets.
6. Canadian open - also has a long history
7. Paris - because it had status even in the late 80s
8. Madrid - johnny come lately. A third clay masters 1000 that we don't need
9. Shanghai
 
Gary20 said:
Is Monte Carlo prestigious? Isnt that the tournament that isnt compulsory to attend? I would drop MC not Madrid as Madrid is fan friendly and modern. Rome v IW is interesting.

Interesting you put Cinci ahead of Miami.
Click to expand...
Yes, Monte Carlo has always been a very lucrative and high profile Tourney. It still is, the fact it's not compulsory is due to the lack of courts and reduced field and has nothing to do with prestige. For the same reason Queens will never be a Masters. All masters where non-compulsory up until recently. Majors are not compulsory and they have prestige of elevated degree. The audience for Monte Carlo often includes some of the greatest of the open era, such as Borg and Nastase (sp). It's one Tourney where the players wives and family frequent and has always fielded a very strong field.

Miami used to coloqualiy be known as the 5th Slam.
Click to expand...
No it wasn't only in your world. Rome was considered as a Major but considered too concentrated having 3 Majors in Western Europe and 1 in the US. Miami has not exist long enough to be considered a Major, 1985 was not long ago and it always competes against IW so does not really stand out except for the humid high bounce and spin. Some people say the same about Cinci. And I'm sure China would want a Major and pushes Shanghai.

Dubai has as much competition as MC, and due to it being HC (where most players are more competitive) I'd actually say it's the superior tournament.
Click to expand...
Dubai is basically an EXO, they endorse the selected top players significantly to play there, hence the great Top 8 field. There was a newspaper article suggesting Nadal was offered more appearance money than winning a Masters or the actual Tourney. Makes for a great Tourney by lacks prestige other than it's in Dubai. Queens has had a very long heritage of sporting a great field until Halle started endorsing players more. There could be arguement to weight some ATP500 to 750 as they purchase a stronger field than normal, but at the end of the day the points are only for seedings. ITF still has higher value as No.1 player of the year as they rank the best player rather than Tournaments, and the history of APT ranks has been iffy at best until they controller the sport with compulsory Tourneys, Masters. The reality is a Major is realistically worth 3-4x a Masters. They are still very significant Tourneys, especially now that they are compulsory. Dubia, Halle and Queens are knid of a league of their own, as not a Major and not a compulsory Masters, but generally support a good enough field to be considered above other 500. But there are enough 1000, and dropping Madrid to me would make sense. In general the calendar is very good, not only for the Top 4,10, 16 but for the No.50-100.
 
PMChambers said:
Yes, Monte Carlo has always been a very lucrative and high profile Tourney. It still is, the fact it's not compulsory is due to the lack of courts and reduced field and has nothing to do with prestige. For the same reason Queens will never be a Masters. All masters where non-compulsory up until recently. Majors are not compulsory and they have prestige of elevated degree. The audience for Monte Carlo often includes some of the greatest of the open era, such as Borg and Nastase (sp). It's one Tourney where the players wives and family frequent and has always fielded a very strong field.

No it wasn't only in your world. Rome was considered as a Major but considered too concentrated having 3 Majors in Western Europe and 1 in the US. Miami has not exist long enough to be considered a Major, 1985 was not long ago and it always competes against IW so does not really stand out except for the humid high bounce and spin. Some people say the same about Cinci. And I'm sure China would want a Major and pushes Shanghai.

Dubai is basically an EXO, they endorse the selected top players significantly to play there, hence the great Top 8 field. There was a newspaper article suggesting Nadal was offered more appearance money than winning a Masters or the actual Tourney. Makes for a great Tourney by lacks prestige other than it's in Dubai. Queens has had a very long heritage of sporting a great field until Halle started endorsing players more. There could be arguement to weight some ATP500 to 750 as they purchase a stronger field than normal, but at the end of the day the points are only for seedings. ITF still has higher value as No.1 player of the year as they rank the best player rather than Tournaments, and the history of APT ranks has been iffy at best until they controller the sport with compulsory Tourneys, Masters. The reality is a Major is realistically worth 3-4x a Masters. They are still very significant Tourneys, especially now that they are compulsory. Dubia, Halle and Queens are knid of a league of their own, as not a Major and not a compulsory Masters, but generally support a good enough field to be considered above other 500. But there are enough 1000, and dropping Madrid to me would make sense. In general the calendar is very good, not only for the Top 4,10, 16 but for the No.50-100.
Click to expand...
To me Madrid should be either put into grass to be the grass masters 1000 or Hamburg should replace it back but be on grass to be the grass masters 1000. There is no need to have 3 clay masters 1000
 
20th Century Ranking
Rome
Monte Carlo
Miami
Canadian Open
Cincinnati
Indian Wells
Hamburg
Paris
Stuttgart

21st Century Ranking
Indian Wells
Rome
Cincinnati
Miami
Canadian Open
Shanghai
Paris
Madrid
Monte Carlo
 
I can talk which ones ı dont like Madrid and Paris. The rest pretty much the same importance to be honest.
 
Interesting replies by everyone. I like how many of you value history over prize money.

We do need a masters 1000 on grass or in fact two. Ideally I wish we had three on clay, three on hard and three on grass. That would make the world rankings more prestigious as it would be more reflective of who the best player is in terms of completeness.
 
Indian wells
Rome (don't know why, but everyone seems to think so)
Cincinnati
Miami
Shanghai
Canada
Madrid
Monte Carlo
Paris
 
Not taking account past-history, Paris is currently the least of all the Master 1000 in my opinion, because it's a priority for none of the top players, who are all already looking for the Master Cup. Evidences in the list of recent winner-finalist: Soderling, Tsonga, Berdych, Davydenko, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Stepanek, Hrbaty, Ljubicic, Janowicz, Raonic, Llodra, Monfils...

For the other masters, I think they are pretty much all equivalent with the exception of Rome who has both history and epic matches in recent times (Nadal-Djokovic, Nadal-Federer, Nadal-Coria, Nadal-Davydenko to mention a few).
 
Gary20 said:
Interesting replies by everyone. I like how many of you value history over prize money.

We do need a masters 1000 on grass or in fact two. Ideally I wish we had three on clay, three on hard and three on grass. That would make the world rankings more prestigious as it would be more reflective of who the best player is in terms of completeness.
Click to expand...

As much as we'd all love a Grass M1000 it won't be happening anytime soon...or probably ever unless the current calendar massively changes.
Was a full thread on this a few months back & was fairly universally agreed that while everyone would love to see one (mostly at expense of Madrid) it's just not currently feasible for plethora of reasons.
 
Ok hypothetically spe
Dave1982 said:
As much as we'd all love a Grass M1000 it won't be happening anytime soon...or probably ever unless the current calendar massively changes.
Was a full thread on this a few months back & was fairly universally agreed that while everyone would love to see one (mostly at expense of Madrid) it's just not currently feasible for plethora of reasons.
Click to expand...
Ok hypothetically speaking, if there were 3 Grass Masters 1000's, 3 Masters HC and three on Clay, and WTF indoors on carpet, and the Slams as they are now, what do we think would be the rankins if the Big 3 were all at their best? Id love to say Nadal would be top dog, but alas, i think it would be Federer top, Nadal second and Djokovic third.
 
Gary20 said:
Ok hypothetically spe

Ok hypothetically speaking, if there were 3 Grass Masters 1000's, 3 Masters HC and three on Clay, and WTF indoors on carpet, and the Slams as they are now, what do we think would be the rankins if the Big 3 were all at their best? Id love to say Nadal would be top dog, but alas, i think it would be Federer top, Nadal second and Djokovic third.
Click to expand...

Yeah you might be right....with each at their peak you can probably mount an argument for all in any order to be honest.
I'll say ranking would be Fed, Nadal, Djokovic only on basis of consistency of each.
 
None of these really matter. Only the Grand Slams really matter. The players get so far to make a certain amount of money and/or points and are content. Djokovic will let these guys have a little here and there and occasion let Fed win one (so he'll feel better about himself).
 
Gary20 said:
Is Monte Carlo prestigious? Isnt that the tournament that isnt compulsory to attend? I would drop MC not Madrid as Madrid is fan friendly and modern. Rome v IW is interesting.

Interesting you put Cinci ahead of Miami.
Click to expand...
It became non-compulsory a few years ago. The tournament is more than 100 years old. That's prestige baby.
 
In terms of historical prestige:

1. Canada (Rogers Cup): founded 1881
2. Monte Carlo: founded 1897
3. Cincinnati: founded 1899
4. Rome (Italian Open): founded 1930
5. Paris-Bercy: founded 1968
6. Indian Wells: founded 1974
7. Miami: founded 1985
8. Madrid: founded 1990
9. Shanghai: founded 2009

In terms of current prestige (in my opinion):

1. Indian Wells (96 draw)
2. Miami (96 draw)
3. Rome (Italian Open)
4. Cincinnati
5. Canada (Rogers Cup)
6. Madrid
7. Shanghai
8. Paris-Bercy
9. Monte Carlo (non-mandatory)
 
Mainad said:
In terms of historical prestige:

1. Canada (Rogers Cup): founded 1881
2. Monte Carlo: founded 1897
3. Cincinnati: founded 1899
4. Rome (Italian Open): founded 1930
5. Paris-Bercy: founded 1968
6. Indian Wells: founded 1974
7. Miami: founded 1985
8. Madrid: founded 1990
9. Shanghai: founded 2009

In terms of current prestige (in my opinion):

1. Indian Wells (96 draw)
2. Miami (96 draw)
3. Rome (Italian Open)
4. Cincinnati
5. Canada (Rogers Cup)
6. Madrid
7. Shanghai
8. Paris-Bercy
9. Monte Carlo (non-mandatory)
Click to expand...
Poor MC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GloW
Predict the 2025 season for the following top five players
Replies
36
Views
2K
Aabye5
Aabye5
D
Predict 2015
Replies
33
Views
3K
Fiji
Fiji
C
Predict the ATP World Tour Masters 1000 winners this year
2
Replies
59
Views
8K
monfed
M
I
Predict 2022 Masters 1000 & ATP Finals winners
Replies
7
Views
725
Nadalgaenger
Nadalgaenger
M
Since 2005 and Masters Series Finals
Replies
13
Views
2K
Towser83
Towser83
Back
Top