Tennis needs a grass Masters. Or at least a WTF which rotates between surfaces.

BlueClayGOAT

Semi-Pro
Grass tennis is so exciting because it brings out nuances of touch and finesse you simply don't see on HC. A grass Masters is hence necessary. Cancel one of Paris and Shanghai.
As for the WTF, it is a one-of-its-kind event, and hence needs to rotate between surfaces so that the top players can face each other in a variety of conditions. Having it alternate between grass, clay, and fast HC (since there aren't enough fast HC on the rest of the tour) would provide good variety.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
wait but if the masters were distributed fairly then the masters nuthuggers will have no more arguments at their disposal...
 

Slicerman

Semi-Pro
I'm all for a little change-up, but wouldn't a masters 1000 on grass diminish the exclusivity and prestige of Wimbledon? I also feel its more exciting if there's fewer chances to win on grass, making the stakes seem higher.
 

TennisATP

Professional
Grass tennis is so exciting because it brings out nuances of touch and finesse you simply don't see on HC. A grass Masters is hence necessary. Cancel one of Paris and Shanghai.
As for the WTF, it is a one-of-its-kind event, and hence needs to rotate between surfaces so that the top players can face each other in a variety of conditions. Having it alternate between grass, clay, and fast HC (since there aren't enough fast HC on the rest of the tour) would provide good variety.
Grass :rolleyes: This isn't the PGA, it's the ATP.
 

pame

Hall of Fame
I'm all for a little change-up, but wouldn't a masters 1000 on grass diminish the exclusivity and prestige of Wimbledon? I also feel its more exciting if there's fewer chances to win on grass, making the stakes seem higher.
Well then, doesn't RG deserve to be treated as exclusive, and therefore there should be fewer chance to win on clay. Ergo, there should be no clay masters.
 

Slicerman

Semi-Pro
Well then, doesn't RG deserve to be treated as exclusive, and therefore there should be fewer chance to win on clay. Ergo, there should be no clay masters.
The difference is that clay and hard court are very common surface types. The fact that there are limited number of grass court tournaments itself makes grass unique and gives grass court tennis it's allure.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
A grass M1000 would be nice although I would keep WTF like it is on indoor HC. My biggest complaint on the entire schedule (couple others wont name) is having Hamburg after Wimbledon. It use to be a good tournament now its lost in the schedule. No one wants to play on clay immediately following Wimbledon o_O
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
I have thought a lot about this. If you follow the trends back over the decade grass could actually have gone the way of carpet by now if it wasn't for Wimbledon. From all reports it is a difficult and expensive surface to maintain whereas hard courts are relatively more inexpensive and easier to maintain.

I do not doubt the tradition, prestige and status of Wimbledon but I am saying that is the actual reason that grass still exists. The staunchly traditional organisation that is the All England Club will not move from grass as other slams have and most of the other handful of grass tournaments that still exist other than Wimbledon are warm up tournaments for the event itself.

I am not happy about it as diversity of court surface is an interesting and important part of the game but I feel that as the decades roll on further, hard courts will start to eat into the clay season too. I think tennis will be the loser if we play the entire season on hard courts but I think that is the way we are going in the future (think 30 or more years ahead) with the exception of two bastions of resistance; Wimbledon and a couple of grass warm up tournaments and Roland Garros and a couple of clay warm up tournaments.

It is for this reason I don't believe that the ATP will introduce a grass court masters.

I am ok for the WTF to be indoors and even on hard court but I think the location could be somewhere other than a location that already has a grand slam tournament to help spread the game around the word a little better. It is for this same reason I have often questioned Paris getting a Masters 1000 and a Grand Slam also. Could these two tournaments be sent to The Middle East, South-East Asia or India? I know the financial base of tennis is Europe and North America but we need to continue to expand and use our top events and stars to do so.
 
Last edited:

skip1969

Legend
The calendar has always been a bit of a mess. It's crammed as it is and the decisions that the ATP make aren't necessarily made in the best interest of the game or the future of the game.

I don't know if we'll ever see more of a balanced schedule (in terms of surfaces). But I'm all for a longer grass season. I just don't think it will happen. And it's not cos grass is expensive to maintain, either.
 

pame

Hall of Fame
The difference is that clay and hard court are very common surface types. The fact that there are limited number of grass court tournaments itself makes grass unique and gives grass court tennis it's allure.
No.. all that does (without the bogus, casuist rationalisation) is put it, and the players who are decent on it, at a disadvantage
 

BlueClayGOAT

Semi-Pro
I love how the new poasters think that responses like these proves legitimacy, LOL. p.s. get a clue, has nothing to do with tennis expertise, but rather knowledge of the goings on here.
It stands to reason that a new poster would know less than the older members. Do you have anything significant to say? If not, you are perfectly free to ignore threads which you don't like.
 

Vanilla Slice

Semi-Pro
Vanilla Slice's ATP Tour Plan for a variety filled and more expansive schedule:

- keep the wtf on indoor hard and move it to mid-late October
- move wtf out of London and have it rotate from South America to Asia to expand game
- get rid of Paris Masters (already a slam there)
- add a grass masters in a new country in europe
- turn Shanghai into a carpet masters
- get rid of clay tournaments post Wimbledon
- make Madrid blue clay for variety on clay
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Vanilla Slice's ATP Tour Plan for a variety filled and more expansive schedule:

- keep the wtf on indoor hard and move it to mid-late October
- move wtf out of London and have it rotate from South America to Asia to expand game
- get rid of Paris Masters (already a slam there)
- add a grass masters in a new country in europe
- turn Shanghai into a carpet masters
- get rid of clay tournaments post Wimbledon
- make Madrid blue clay for variety on clay
I like it...all of it.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Grass tennis is so exciting because it brings out nuances of touch and finesse you simply don't see on HC. A grass Masters is hence necessary. Cancel one of Paris and Shanghai.
As for the WTF, it is a one-of-its-kind event, and hence needs to rotate between surfaces so that the top players can face each other in a variety of conditions. Having it alternate between grass, clay, and fast HC (since there aren't enough fast HC on the rest of the tour) would provide good variety.
What do you think of @limmt post?

:cool:
 

chrisb

Semi-Pro
It stands to reason that a new poster would know less than the older members. Do you have anything significant to say? If not, you are perfectly free to ignore threads which you don't like.
So the debate goes to quantitative v qualitative analysis? Should we be looking at years on the site or years in the game? I think making a blanket statement on either position is false, the quality of the post should be the only determining factor
 

BlueClayGOAT

Semi-Pro
A grass master yes sure.

But rotate the WTF, no. It's the only big tournament on indoor HC.
I understand what you're saying, but we at least have an indoor Masters tournament. Admittedly it is the least important Masters, but it is still worth 1000 points.
As for why i suggested the WTF should be rotated, the format of the tournament is unique in the calendar. Top 8 players only and round-robin stages. Hence why i think it deserves to be played on all surfaces. If not every year (logistical issues), maybe it could be rotated between venues every 3 years or so. Just a suggestion i'm throwing out.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
I understand what you're saying, but we at least have an indoor Masters tournament. Admittedly it is the least important Masters, but it is still worth 1000 points.
As for why i suggested the WTF should be rotated, the format of the tournament is unique in the calendar. Top 8 players only and round-robin stages. Hence why i think it deserves to be played on all surfaces. If not every year (logistical issues), maybe it could be rotated between venues every 3 years or so. Just a suggestion i'm throwing out.
Abandoning indoor tennis, because there is one Masters on the surface, is not a compelling argument.

The sport is suffering from a lack of variety as it is, so this will only make the problem worse.

In fact, having the fifth largest tennis tournament on a surface/in conditions that are different from the Majors provides for a test for the players that want to share the highest honour of being the best of the best, that puts a special emphasis on different skillset,which will be lost, if it is "just another tournament".

The different surface and the format a kind of elevates the tournament above the usual M1000.

If carpet and indoor hard were more widely presented I probably would have thought a bit differently, but even then the great tradition of that tournament is in line with what is happening now with it.

I think that in the last years only Houston has been unsurprisingly a bit of a letdown, a victim of the aforementioned ordinary conditions more than anything.

:cool:
 

BlueClayGOAT

Semi-Pro
Abandoning indoor tennis, because there is one Masters on the surface, is not a compelling argument.

The sport is suffering from a lack of variety as it is, so this will only make the problem worse.

In fact, having the fifth largest tennis tournament on a surface/in conditions that are different from the Majors provides for a test for the players that want to share the highest honour of being the best of the best, that puts a special emphasis on different skillset,which will be lost, if it is "just another tournament".

The different surface and the format a kind of elevates the tournament above the usual M1000.

If carpet and indoor hard were more widely presented I probably would have thought a bit differently, but even then the great tradition of that tournament is in line with what is happening now with it.

I think that in the last year's only Houston has been unsurprisingly a bit of a letdown, a victim of the aforementioned ordinary conditions more than anything.

:cool:
Fair enough. Maybe rotating the WTF is not really necessary.

And yes, the game does need more variety in terms of court speeds and conditions. Fast court tennis is a joy to watch.

But I'd still certainly want at least one grass Masters. It can't be that hard- we have 2 500 level grass tournaments. It's faintly ridiculous that what used to be the primary and premier tennis surface doesn't even have a Masters any more.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
A grass Masters is hence necessary. Cancel one of Paris and Shanghai.
No need to cancel any 1000 in the Fall, just make Halle a 1000. Queens apparently can't be transformed into a 1000 event because of limitations with parking and the venue itself. But Halle could do it, I've been there and with another show court, they could make it a 1000--- they already have a retractable roof. Had there been just one grass Masters 1000, Federer would have had another 10 of them.
 

Sport

Legend
A grass master yes sure.

But rotate the WTF, no. It's the only big tournament on indoor HC.
Biased. There should be some Masters 1000 on grass sure. But they should rotate the WTF. Some years it should be played on indoor clay, others on indoor grass and others on indoor hard courts (not only on indoor hard courts every year). That's the genuine way of pursuing the universalization of surfaces.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Biased. There should be some Masters 1000 on grass sure. But they should rotate the WTF. Some years it should be played on indoor clay, others on indoor grass and others on indoor hard courts (not only on indoor hard courts every year). That's the genuine way of pursuing the universalization of surfaces.
What is this "universalization of the surfaces" you are talking about?

:confused:
 

ultradr

Legend
Tennis needs a longer grass season.
yes. this will make grass court tennis much more competitive.

It would make harder for one player to dominate Wimbledon.

p.s. This will also make Wimbledon have more motivation to have their court surface more
differentiate from the rest of tour. Last 15+ years, they succumbed to outside pressure
and made their surface more similar to clay and bouncy hard courts. Otherwise, Wimbledon
was risking becoming obscure tennis.
 

mightyjeditribble

Hall of Fame
Ideally, four weeks of grass-court tennis before Wimbledon. First week has two 500s, then two back-to-back MS1000, then a week of 250s in the week right before Wimbledon. This would give a similar run-in as RG & USO.

Alternatively (because the world isn't perfect), one week of 250s, one of 500s, then an MS1000, then the week of 250s. (I.e., insert a masters into the grass season after Queens/Halle.)

A few questions to address:

a) Capacity to enable a MS1000 event. Queens & Halle would be the most natural choices, but from what I have heard (?) neither might be able to support the required numbers.

b) Cost of maintaining grass courts (often quoted as a reason for the reduction in grass-court tournaments).

c) The extra week must be found from somewhere else in the calendar.

d) Some masters tournaments elsewhere would need to be scrapped / downgraded.

It seems to me that it should be possible to solve a). For example, if there is only one new MS1000 event, could it be at Hamburg, which used to be a Masters. Admittedly, somewhere further south might be better weather-wise. In any case, it seems there would be solutions if the desire was there to make this happen.

I don't know enough about b) to comment. But current grass-court tournaments seem to be managing, and other sports are played on grass also. (Admittedly, quality of the grass may be less of an problem e.g. in football where the pitch is so much bigger, and fidelity of the bounce less of an issue.)

As for c) and d), here is a possible solution: Get rid of one of the three clay-court MS. E.g., change Madrid (weird tune-up for RG anyway due to altitude) to a 500, move it parallel with Barcelona (so two 500 in the same week), stop one of the current clay 250s in that week; have Monte-Carlo be the second (compulsory) clay MS.

The issue with this suggestion is that we would end up with 9 or 10 compulsory MS events, whereas currently there are only 8, and the calendar is pretty full as it is. But there would be some nice symmetry: two MS associated to each of the GS, and 2 for the WTF.

The other thing is that we are taking away from clay instead of grass, rather than reducing the amount of HC tournaments in favour of the natural surfaces. But the only other choice really would be to reduce the North-American hardcourt season, and I am not sure that would be too popular.

Any thoughts?
 

Sport

Legend
A grass master yes sure.

But rotate the WTF, no. It's the only big tournament on indoor HC.
Fallacy of false dichotomy. It is possible to rotate the WTF some years on indoor clay and indoor grass as well (not only indoor HC every year). So you wouldn't lose the "indoor" condition, despite rotating.

You are also displaying a double standard logic. Either we pursue surface distribution in all cases or we don't pursue surface distribution at all.

Real surface distribution would be like this:

3 Masters 1000 on grass.
3 Masters 1000 on clay.
3 Masters 1000 on hard courts.

WTF alternative rotating each year between indoor grass, indoor clay and indoor hard courts.

You can make Paris-Bercy optional and put a preparatory Master 500 on indoor grass and another on indoor clay before the WTF. Then the years that the WTF is played on indoor grass or indoor clay, players could skip Paris-Bercy and prepare themselves in a mini-grass season or mini-clay season by playing a preparatory event.
 
Last edited:

zaph

Semi-Pro
It isn't going to happen, players will only play on the same surface as the next major. So with the US Open on hard courts and the French Open on clay, there is limited room for more grass events. Especially since Wimbledon has to be at the height of summer, due to the British weather and the nature of the surfaces.

The only possibility is more 250 events in the hard court season, like the clay court events in the hard court season, which attract clay court specialists. There might be a few lower ranked serve and volley players that wouldn't mind an easy run in a 250 fast grass event. However the most likely association to do that is the British LTA and they couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
No one plays on grass, it should have zero big tournaments.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Yes.

Let's start with grass in 2018, then fast HC in 2019, medium HC in 2020, slow HC in 2021 and then maybe clay in 2022 to make sure Nadal is old enough so he can't vulture WTFarlo.
 
Top