eldanger25
Hall of Fame
Yes. It should also move venues each year (while staying indoors). Seems like a missed opportunity not to send the Top 8 players of the year to different regions to grow the sport.
Should the WTF be alternatively played on indoor HC, indoor clay and indoor grass?
- Thread starter Sport
- Start date
Tennisanity
Legend
Sure, as long as the FO can be alternated to be on grass.
AlexanderTheGreat08
Hall of Fame
Nah but it should be outdoors, But Nadal will win that shet this year
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
#NadalKingOfMastersOnlyDueToClayDomination
#FedFansAreTrueBecauseEverySurfaceShouldHaveAtleastOneMasters, #ItsNotAboutButthurt&ItsAboutSurfaceEqualityAsGrassDoesNotHaveRepresentationAsAnotherNaturalSurfaceClay
#NadalFansAreButthurt
#BecauseIndoorsAreHisWeakestCondition
#ThatIsWhyNadsFansWantClayEverywhere
#ThereIsAlreadyEnoughOfClay
#WTFshouldBeOnNeutralSurface&HCisTheMostNeutral
#ItsNotTheFaultOfIndoorHCsIf*Fakeinjuridal*CanNotAdjustWithIt
Nadal Fans be like :- "Hey I can not earn promotion in company, so the company should change its policies"
Manute Bol
New User
I think it should rotate cites and continents more often. It’s been in London for too long.
The surface should depends of where it’s being played so it makes sense. If it’s in Australia or India, it’s should not be indoors, make hard or grass. If it’s in South America make it clay as it is traditional there. If it’s Russia, make it indoors obviously.
The surface should depends of where it’s being played so it makes sense. If it’s in Australia or India, it’s should not be indoors, make hard or grass. If it’s in South America make it clay as it is traditional there. If it’s Russia, make it indoors obviously.
justasport
Professional
The end of the year is played on indoor hard courts so that's what the major tournament at the end of the year should be played on.....we have warmup tournaments for the Australian open, roland garros, Wimbledon, and the us open so why not for the atp world championships....it's the fifth major of the year whether people like it or not
AlexanderTheGreat08
Hall of Fame
Why is it fair for Djokovic(A hardcourter) to have the WTF on HC? , I think only 4 CC specialist have won the WTF , Most of the champions are Hardcourters or are equally good on HC&Grass.Lendl , Sampras , Djokovic with 5 titles.Last years Champion was a Hardcourter
aman92
Legend
Completely agree....grass is hardly played for a month and Fed fans want on one of the smaller events to be upgraded to Masters 1000 and then they complain that Nadal is ahead only because of 3 events being played on clay. Well yeah, Federer is also only ahead in WTFs because it's played in Nadal's worst surface and Fed's best
ADuck
Legend
Having the YEC change surface every year isn't really a practical idea because first off the player's have just been playing on indoor HC's and secondly, different player's are qualifying every single year so it's not really 'equality' if one player is there one year and not there the next. It's going to be unfair no matter what the surface is anyway. There's not multiple WTF's every year like there are majors or masters so the fact that there's this one special kind of tournament which is only catered to a specific player type diminishes its value. It'd be better if there were multiple WTF's each with different surfaces/conditions but then that would defeat the purpose of its own existence. That's really the main dilemma the tournament has but I dont see a solution to it besides scrapping it and replacing it with a master or upgrading it to a slam.
AlexanderTheGreat08
Hall of Fame
Just make that shet outdoors and everything is alright
Tennis_Hands
Banned
OP, how about applying your logic (btw, that is not the logic behind the grass Masters thread) to Roland Garros?
Next year on grass, no?
Next year on grass, no?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
It is amazing how you Incorporated what you learned in previous conversations in words, bit never understood what it actually means, thus repeating the same BS (never come around to answer those questions in the other thread too). Not one tournament or system can be "fair" to everyone, and that is not the objective.
It caters to its own unique (now less so than in the past) conditions.
That aside, the fact that it has been won by Djokovic, a player that has very different style than Federer proves directly that your statement is not true.
Also, the fact that it has its own unique challenges makes it rise in value, not as you incorrectly said "diminishes its value".
Finally, is it me or your last proposal doesn't make sense, considering all that you said before: if it is promoted to a Major then all your contentions about it rewarding too many points, having all those problems with its system of qualifying, points distribution etc will be even more pronounced.
Or was it some sort of saying to have its core changed and simply made something else entirely, so that it doesn't come into the memory as it is?
The surface and conditions of the YEC cater to pure tennis.
ADuck
Legend
The entire premise of WTF is you get the top 8 players of the season and get them to face off and the best man wins, except there's a problem if you define the top 8 players of the season as the player's who have gained the most amount of points as those points are gained on HC, clay and grass. The reason why it's 'unfair' no matter the surface at the WTF and NOT the slams is for that reason (and even if you use the argument that slams work the same way with how you qualify and that it's just a bigger pool of players, it's not the same because there's 4 slams you can qualify on per year with multiple surfaces compared to one WTF with one surface) My stance has always been the same. If it were promoted to a slam, well then it wouldn't be WTF, it'd replicate all other slams, so there wouldnt be anything to complain about besides the argument that there's too heavy an influence on the amount of hard courts slams or points you can gain on the tour.It is amazing how you Incorporated what you learned in previous conversations in words, bit never understood what it actually means, thus repeating the same BS (never come around to answer those questions in the other thread too). Not one tournament or system can be "fair" to everyone, and that is not the objective.
It caters to its own unique (now less so than in the past) conditions.
That aside, the fact that it has been won by Djokovic, a player that has very different style than Federer proves directly that your statement is not true.
Also, the fact that it has its own unique challenges makes it rise in value, not as you incorrectly said "diminishes its value".
Finally, is it me or your last proposal doesn't make sense, considering all that you said before: if it is promoted to a Major then all your contentions about it rewarding too many points, having all those problems with its system of qualifying, points distribution etc will be even more pronounced.
Or was it some sort of saying to have its core changed and simply made something else entirely, so that it doesn't come into the memory as it is?
The fact that Djokovic has won it is besides the point. Different surfaces cater to different styles of play. Indoor hardcourts reward and punish different play styles. You only purposely misinterpreted that point.
The fact that WTF tournaments can only be won on indoor HC means players who win it excel on indoor hardcourts. Slams as a group of tournaments cater to all different play styles, hence slam winners can represent players who excel on all surfaces. This puts all slam winners on a different level to WTF winners. This is one of the reasons why being a slam-winner is worth far more in value than being a WTF winner. Slams + WTF's should never be uttered in the same sentence when comparing achievements because it's laughable that they could be even comparable. They're closer to being a 10th masters tournament than a 5th slam.
pame
Hall of Fame
ok, let's do this instead,, since you think it's ok for clay to have all-year round tournaments everywhere in the world and grass has barely a month: we'll make the grass season longer and have 3 grass masters as well as the 500's; we'll switch the major clay season to take the place of the grass with two 500s, and the Slam, no masters.
There! That takes care of the OP mewling about people wanting surface equality... the above proposal maintains surface inequality - which should mightily satisfy the OP
As for Fed being ahead in the WTF's because it's played blah blah, that's only ONE tournament per year. Nadal has THREE tournaments each year to get ahead of Fed.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I don't need you to repeat everything you said in the other thread, because if you do want to go that road, go back and start the discussion from where you brought it to a stop by refusing to answer the questions asked.
Other than that: I am glad (not for the sake of the readers, mind you!) that I got your absurd "suggestion", of turning the WTF into something it has never been, has no necessity of being and something that it in fact will never be. So it was just you masquerading possibilities and open-mindedness rather than something of substance.
As for me "misinterpreting" your point, you said that the surface caters to a "specific player type", which I directly confronted with giving example with two different "player types". Unless you specify further what you mean by "player type" your statement about "misinterpretation" is misplaced.
Again, for maybe 5th time in our discussions: comparing all 4 Majors to one tournament surface-wise is an abysmal way to make your point: either compare them one to one, or stop with this BS. Or if you want point out that the winner of the WTF can win theoretically 1500 pts on one surface as opposed to 8000 pts for the winner of all 4 Majors on different surfaces. Looking at it it doesn't seem very unfair to me. Multiple surfaces > more points. One surface > quite a lot less.
As for your strawman argument (really, not one that has even a reasonable level of logic and knowledge agrees that the WTF belongs to the Majors as prestige now), I don't see why you should introduce it: it is obvious to me that you are making it to dilute the discussion.
ADuck
Legend
You refused, not me. I offered you an opportunity to lay your argument out across the table in a clear and concise manner with actual structure, instead of making random one-line strawman arguments which are unrelated or only make sense in limited context. Here's some advice, think for opponent and try to understand his argument and only then can you try and defeat it, if my argument is fallacious in logic then it should be easy to counter it without yourself using fallacious argument tactics. I'm having to repeat myself constantly because you are incapable of that.I don't need you to repeat everything you said in the other thread, because if you do want to go that road, go back and start the discussion from where you brought it to a stop by refusing to answer the questions asked.
Other than that: I am glad (not for the sake of the readers, mind you!) that I got your absurd "suggestion", of turning the WTF into something it has never been, has no necessity of being and something that it in fact will never be. So it was just you masquerading possibilities and open-mindedness rather than something of substance.
As for me "misinterpreting" your point, you said that the surface caters to a "specific player type", which I directly confronted with giving example with two different "player types". Unless you specify further what you mean by "player type" your statement about "misinterpretation" is misplaced.
Again, for maybe 5th time in our discussions: comparing all 4 Majors to one tournament surface-wise is an abysmal way to make your point: either compare them one to one, or stop with this BS. Or if you want point out that the winner of the WTF can win theoretically 1500 pts on one surface as opposed to 8000 pts for the winner of all 4 Majors on different surfaces. Looking at it it doesn't seem very unfair to me. Multiple surfaces > more points. One surface > quite a lot less.
As for your strawman argument (really, not one that has even a reasonable level of logic and knowledge agrees that the WTF belongs to the Majors as prestige now), I don't see why you should introduce it: it is obvious to me that you are making it to dilute the discussion.
Oh look, for the 6th time in our argument, i'm grouping the slams because they are identical in qualification, draw structure, point distribution and achievement. WTF is not. It's completely fair that I can make these comparisons for all the reasons I have argued as well. It's like you're purposely refusing to comprehend that to avoid getting your ego shat on. Get a better argument or get over it.
Ironically, if you call that a strawman that means you concede my entire argument. Lmao.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Yes, that was mentioned in regards to Fed fans always butthurt about grass not having more masters. Great post captain...
Tennis_Hands
Banned
That is not true.
Our arguments were clearly stated until you hit a wall that you cannot overcome, so you tried to reset the discussion. BTW, the questions are still available in the thread, if you are willing to continue.
Everything else you say now is not a representation of what happened, since you could have pointed at any arguments with problematical logic, which you did not do at the time, but still can do, if you want to see whether your claim here holds any water.
I am not refusing you to group the Majors in one group and the WTF (another strawman argument) in another (separate) category.
I am refusing you to use the Majors as a group, but to ignore their points' weight as a group against the pts weight of a single tournament (which is its own "group"). That is what you refuse to acknowledge.
So, you now say that what I am arguing is that WTF = Major.
Please quote anything (and I mean from any thread or any post I have made here on these boards) that suggests that.
If you cannot you can log off.
I repeat: quotes that you prove that I claimed that WTF = Majors.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
You forgot the
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
Yes, that was mentioned in regards to Fed fans always butthurt about grass not having more masters. Great post captain...
Grass does not have masters is unfair and its logical to argue about it, its nothing butthurt about it..
Clay has enough share of it and does not need more tournaments and especially no interference on WTF
Its rightful to ask for grass masters as there is only 1 big tournament on it, but it is not rightful to ask for clay WTF as it has already 4 big tournaments....
Simple logic, you can not measure practical quantities of steel and length of cloathes with a same scale...
Basically all the VB s**theads want majority or atleast 50% of the big titles to be on clay so that nadal can grind out and win them all. Its like, if you can not pass the exams you'll cry and loudly ba*k to change the whole syllabus in your favour...
- To all those, I will just say
Tennis_Hands
Banned
You forgot the
I accidentally posted the beginning of my post, which obviously was not finished.
Now it is.
ADuck
Legend
LOL. When did I "claim" that you ever said that? Why don't you quote me where I said that you claimed that first
Tennis_Hands
Banned
LOL. When did I "claim" that you ever said that? Why don't you quote me where I said that you claimed that first
You said that me calling your argument "strawman" is conceding the point.
I called your argument strawman, because you address something that I never said and keep repeating it (that noone should put WTF and the Majors at the same level).
What exactly am I conceding?
Haha you haven't understood this concept at all have you
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
No.
Zeref
Professional
Lol Nadal's worst. So he has 3 worst surfaces (HC, Grass and Indoor HC)now?and 1 best, tell him to adjust then.If a surface is not your best, it doesn't automatically become your worst mate.And Fed's best is Grass btw.
Also WTF on Indoor HC is logical, it gives Indoor tennis it's major tournament. And HC has much more depth is almost neutral than both extremes (Grass and Clay). If you see any Fed fan Saying WTF should be on indoor grass then it would be the same scenario as ************* asking for Clay WTF.
Masters distribution should be same as Slam distribution and Many of us don't care for Masters BTW, it is minor tournament. I don't even care for WTF that much.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
The argumentation against the WTF is turning into a showcase about Nadal's lack of versatility.
Saying that the surface caters to a specific type of player, but then players of all colours win it, shows that it is not about the playing style, but about ability and skill.
Guga won it by beating the best HC players of the generation, despite of his clearly clay-oriented game.
Saying that the surface caters to a specific type of player, but then players of all colours win it, shows that it is not about the playing style, but about ability and skill.
Guga won it by beating the best HC players of the generation, despite of his clearly clay-oriented game.
WTF rewards pure tennis and ball striking. Technically the best players should win.
so basically you are saying wimbeldon is the most prestigious slam followed by AO, USO, RG?
FrontHeadlock
Hall of Fame
The argumentation against the WTF is turning into a showcase about Nadal's lack of versatility.
Saying that the surface caters to a specific type of player, but then players of all colours win it, shows that it is not about the playing style, but about ability and skill.
Guga won it by beating the best HC players of the generation, despite of his clearly clay-oriented game.
I think the issue is more that it's marketed as a year-ending championship for the entire tour, yet it's on indoor hardcourt, a condition that isn't used at any of the 4 majors or 8 of the 9 Masters, and Paris is BY FAR the weakest Masters in terms of historical play.
From that perspective I can see the argument to change it up with both venue and surface/conditions.
If it were simply the 10th Masters of the year, I don't see how anyone would have an argument as to the conditions.
ADuck
Legend
Don't know how you came about that conclusion from that post but *shrugs* i'm getting less and less surprised about people here nowadays
so that is what you think. WIM >>> AO>USO>RG
ADuck
Legend
Lol, you really want me to say no so you can make your *amazing* point about how there's some flaw in my logic if I state otherwise. Stop beating around the bush, let's hear it.
No you do think that about the slams though. Wimbeldon is most prestgious. You dont have to be embarassed most people do.
But yes your logic in many other things is flawed but not about wimbeldon. Wimbeldon is the most prestigious slam there is no doubt
ADuck
Legend
Depends how we use the word prestigious, but yes it is for obvious reasons like how old the tournament is and the tradition it upholds every year. In terms of achievement it's worth the same as any other slam title today, but people still might prefer to win Wimbledon than any other slam.
yes that is why it is most prestigious. it is the most desired and sought after as you said so is the biggest achievement too more than other slams
titoelcolombiano
Legend
I'm fine with it as it is. The only change I would make on the tour is to standardise hardcourt speeds to differentiate outdoor from indoors. Something like: Outdoor hard is medium speed and indoor hard is fast at all tournaments. It would mean:
Clay: Slow
Outdoor Hard: Medium
Grass: Fast
Indoor Hard: Fast
Clay: Slow
Outdoor Hard: Medium
Grass: Fast
Indoor Hard: Fast
You are using false equivalence. HC is not Fed's main surface, grass is. HC is their secondary surface, so there is an equal playing field. But on grass, which is their best surface, Federer is penalized with masters.
Fed is not rewarded enough by having two best surfaces, that's the point. So, HC is a neutral surface for both of those players, that's why Fed is being discriminated against.
Also, you forget one important thing. HC also has much more competition due to HC having most tournaments. So, I think higher level of competition quite compensates for the fact that you have more opportunities to win slams there. And this fact is supported by the fact that Fed has 10 majors same as RAfa on clay even with twice as many of them. Also, Rafa only has 4 HC majors even when he has double the opportunity to win there. So, you see things are quite fair, Fed is justly being rewarded on HC.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I don't see why the surface of the WTF should be determined by what are the prevalent surfaces on the tour. Its surface has never been determined from the surfaces of the Majors, nor those of the Masters (or equivalent) events.
The tournament has its own identity rooted in its tradition, and the current setup is the closest that is allowed to that tradition. Not clay, grass etc.
Saying that because Paris masters is the weakest Masters 1000, it should be changed is a weak sauce, because it has completely different structure and requirements to that, as well as its spot determines to a great extent the interest towards it, yet, there we have had quite a few prominent players triumphing, as well as some interesting players thriving (like Llodra). Also, after the summer/fall HC season it makes a lot of sense to use similar surface, rather than to switch back to anything else, just for that tournament.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
ATP finals should be held indoor only.
A lot of people **** on indoors tennis but its incredible display of attacking tennis. This has to be preserved.
AO/USO - HC
RG - Clay
Wimby - Grass
Let us keep the ATP finals indoors always to have more parity. It can NOT be on clay or grass even indoors because players are tired by end of the year and can't keep adjusting.
Indoor clay already defeats the purpose of having indoor tournaments.
We will see rallies like these
Enjoy.
A lot of people **** on indoors tennis but its incredible display of attacking tennis. This has to be preserved.
AO/USO - HC
RG - Clay
Wimby - Grass
Let us keep the ATP finals indoors always to have more parity. It can NOT be on clay or grass even indoors because players are tired by end of the year and can't keep adjusting.
Indoor clay already defeats the purpose of having indoor tournaments.
We will see rallies like these
Enjoy.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
We would see rallies like these enjoy
enjoy
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
We will see rallies like these Enjoy
Enjoy Similar threads
