Why did they change the Master's Cup final to only best 2 of 3 sets?

[BreakPoint]

The year-end Masters final has ALWAYS been best 3 of 5 sets, and has had some epic finals, like the days of Sampras vs. Becker. Even last year's final was best of 5 with Federer taking out Ferrer in 3 straight sets.

So why the heck was it only best 2 of 3 sets for this year's final?

This is a major significant event that many call the 5th major and IMO it's not a major final unless it's best of 5. I feel like I was short-changed this year.

 

[HyperHorse]

I wondered the same thing too, and then I noticed that the last Masters Cup final @ Houston was only best of 3 sets...
I too would like to know the reason for this...

 

[msc886]

Bring it back to first of 5. It was better that way.

 

[GS]

Was this another bonehead move by ATP president Etienne de Villiers before he leaves office next month? I think so. I guess he doesn't remember that the 2005 final between Nalbandian and Federer was a classic 5-setter.
Too bad tennis has to suffer because of bigshot idiots....
Maybe he cut it down to best-of-3 sets to entice ESPN to continue their TV contract---that didn't work---ESPN bailed out on tennis.
Like that song goes, "It's all in the past now, Money Changes Everything."

 

[BreakPoint]

I wondered the same thing too, and then I noticed that the last Masters Cup final @ Houston was only best of 3 sets...
I too would like to know the reason for this...

That was due to the rain on the day of the final in Houston. They delayed that final several hours and by the time it stopped raining and they could play, it was so late at night that they shortened it to best of 3 sets right before it started.

Shanghai is played indoors so there's no excuse for bad weather.

 

[msc886]

Was this another bonehead move by ATP president Etienne de Villiers before he leaves office next month? I think so. I guess he doesn't remember that the 2005 final between Nalbandian and Federer was a classic 5-setter.
Too bad tennis has to suffer because of bigshot idiots....

I'll have to agree with that. the Nalbandian vs federer match was really good.

 

[SempreSami]

Probably so the high school chess third place play off could be broadcast live on NBC or whatever channel before a re-run of a Williams sister match.

 

[mikeler]

I believe that all the Master's events were made best 2 out of 3 at the request of the players. Hamburg was getting screwed every year because Nadal kept playing 5 set finals in Rome then pulling out of Hamburg.

 

[baseliner]

To fit in the TV schedule. Clear and simple. (Sad but clear).

 

[bluescreen]

that was such a big mistake. did they already forget about the epic fed-nalby final three years ago? wow, its like they want people not to watch the sport anymore.

 

[jrod]

Perhaps the decision is related to the absence of 2 of the top ten players, including #1?

I'd much prefer the 5 set venue, but it does seem like these guys are pretty banged up at the end of the season. I wonder if the ATP is seriously rethinking the schedule at this point?

 

[leonidas1982]

Perhaps the decision is related to the absence of 2 of the top ten players, including #1?

I'd much prefer the 5 set venue, but it does seem like these guys are pretty banged up at the end of the season. I wonder if the ATP is seriously rethinking the schedule at this point?

They aren't. Instead of 13 mandatory events (Grandslams and 9 MS), the players now have 17 mandatory events (Grandslams, 8MS, and 5 gold series).

 

[vbranis]

They aren't. Instead of 13 mandatory events (Grandslams and 9 MS), the players now have 17 mandatory events (Grandslams, 8MS, and 5 gold series).

Monte Carlo is no longer mandatory next year, right? But it's still a MS?:-?

 

[alienhamster]

My guess was that this was also partly due to TV pressure--they tend to like committing to best of 3s rather than best of 5s.

It is silly to have the final match of the year for the best of 8 to be a 2 of 3 set dud. If they want the championship to have any particular prestige, it makes more sense to keep it 3 of 5 like the Slams.

Seemed anti-climactic to me. But I also hate Davydenko's one-dimensional game, so I'm biased.

 

[Lefty5]

seems like it gives more weight to the slams now, no? What tennis needs is less "Big" events, so when the big ones really come around, it actually means something.

What if the World Cup was 5 times a year??? It would be cool for like 1 year then it would suck.

 

[tacou]

^ it's the last match of the year, it deserves the chance to be an epic 5 setter.

though it disappoints me, I understand why masters finals got shortened to best of 3, but this is the last match of the year and for one of the most prestigious titles in the game. it should be best of fiiiive

 

[leonidas1982]

Monte Carlo is no longer mandatory next year, right? But it's still a MS?:-?

Correct, it still keeps its ranking points and prize money, but it will not be mandatory. I expect most of the top players will still attend, except for the Americans. One fails to see why a tournament needs to be mandatory. Ranking points and prize money should be more of an incentive, and when you couple that with appearance fees from both the tournaments and sponsors --- cha ching $$$.

 

[BreakPoint]

I believe that all the Master's events were made best 2 out of 3 at the request of the players. Hamburg was getting screwed every year because Nadal kept playing 5 set finals in Rome then pulling out of Hamburg.

But there's no tournaments after the Master's Cup for almost two months until things start up again in Australia in mid-January. They have plenty of time to rest. Heck, they could even play best of 11 sets and still be fully rested and ready to play the Australian Open in January.

 

[FitzRoy]

Yeah, it should go back to best of 5. Sure, some of the finals with Federer have been totally one-sided, but those would have been even shorter as best of 3. Only in best of 5 can you get a match like the Federer-Nalbandian 2005.

 

[BreakPoint]

To fit in the TV schedule. Clear and simple. (Sad but clear).

My guess was that this was also partly due to TV pressure--they tend to like committing to best of 3s rather than best of 5s.

But Comcast Sports (bought out Fox here) here had set aside a block of 3 hours for the final, whereas, they only set aside 2 hours for all the other round robin matches and the semis. This tells me that even the TV network was expecting a best of 5 sets final and had scheduled their programming accordingly. Now this is a network that only showed one of the two semis and late at night at that, and none of the matches last week were live, so tennis is at the very bottom of their priority list, but they still blocked out 3 hours for the final. Of course they ended up leaving early due to the short match.

 

[matchmaker]

A stupid decision IMO. There have been some epic five setters in the MC. It is supposed to be an extraofficial world championship. They should play it in five if you ask me.

 

[leonidas1982]

not only are some players, maybe more, are not taking the the TMC seriously, but spectators are beginning to see the event as a farce.

Why does the tournament keep changing its name?
Why keep changing number of sets?
Why keep changing the venue?

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

That was due to the rain on the day of the final in Houston. They delayed that final several hours and by the time it stopped raining and they could play, it was so late at night that they shortened it to best of 3 sets right before it started.

Shanghai is played indoors so there's no excuse for bad weather.

a minor correction : appart from this rain delay in 2004, there was also a best-of-3 final between 1977 and 1979...
nb: i don't take into account the 2 first editions of the masters in 1970-1971 when there was no final match as all the players were in a unique group, all matches being played best-of-3.
but that doesn't change anything : i agree with you, this final should be best-of-5 as it (almost) always has been !

and i don't get the comparisons between this tournament and "regular masters series"... the (now called) TMC/WTF? is definitely a league about them and deserves a big final !