Week 32 - ATP 1000 - Coupe Rogers, Montréal, Canada (hard) - doubles

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Week 32 - ATP 1000 - Coupe Rogers, Montréal, Canada (hard) - doubles

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Week 32 - ATP 1000 - Coupe Rogers, Montréal, Canada (hard)

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

QR1: Alejandro Falla (COL) WR 122 defeated (q14) James Ward WR 113 by 2 & 4 disbelief

Jan · Hall of fame

cry

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

Oh dear. I wonder if James should drop to Challengers for a while and get his mojo back.

scottie1 · Futures level

Madeline wrote:
Oh dear. I wonder if James should drop to Challengers for a while and get his mojo back.

Hope WARDY isn't going to do a Mel South big effort to make top 100 then fall back

indiana · Tennis legend

Apart from Andy in the doubles draw, I see Djokovic, Nadal, Berdych, Cilic plus Tsonga & Monfils playing together.

EddietheEagle · County player

Are any taking it seriously? I watched Federer and Henman fooling around together once, pretending to play doubles at a Masters tournament. The tennis wasn't exactly scintillating.

Sim · County player

RE: Week 32 - ATP 1000 - Coupe Rogers, Montréal, Canada (hard) - doubles

indiana · Tennis legend

Good stuff, don't reckon there was too much fooling around there, though the Davis Cup SF may be concentrating Andy's doubles mind.

With Jamie & John's bye to R2, if they lose this match they will pick up just 10 points, whereas if they win they will have a QF place and at least 180 points.

Hope it's competitive.

-- Edited by indiana on Monday 10th of August 2015 08:10:23 PM

Spectator · All-time great

Quite amazing lineup on Court 9: can't recall another instance where one could have watched Messrs Murray, Nadal and Djokovic on one court in one day.

More seriously, once again, I really don't like the way that the Masters series works for doubles. These tournaments are hugely significant for the true doubles pairings: at this stage, each one could make a significant difference to a team's chances to get to the O2 (which in turn has a huge potential impact on their rankings for the next year). The arbitrarily small draws - with eight byes - combined with the number of singles players in the draw makes it almost impossible for those just outside the top to catch up, which seems really problematic. At the very least, if you're going to let in all these singles interlopers, expand the draw!

As for the Murray v Murray match - well, that's even more uncomfortable. I can't imagine Mr Murray junior wanting to lose - but he's got to be conscious that there's at least one team that could pass his elder brother in the race simply by doing really well in this tournament, should Mr Murray senior lose in the 2nd round.

-- Edited by Spectator on Monday 10th of August 2015 08:20:58 PM

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

R1: Andy Murray & Leander Paes (IND) CR 324 (289+35) defeated Kevin Anderson & Jérémy Chardy (RSA/FRA) CR 107 (66+41) by 3 & 1

******

R2: (7) Jamie Murray & John Peers (AUS) CR 35 (18+17) vs Andy Murray & Leander Paes (IND) CR 324 (289+35)

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Spectator wrote:
More seriously, once again, I really don't like the way that the Masters series works for doubles. These tournaments are hugely significant for the true doubles pairings: at this stage, each one could make a significant difference to a team's chances to get to the O2 (which in turn has a huge potential impact on their rankings for the next year). The arbitrarily small draws - with eight byes - combined with the number of singles players in the draw makes it almost impossible for those just outside the top to catch up, which seems really problematic. At the very least, if you're going to let in all these singles interlopers, expand the draw!

I suspect most of us know the answer to that, but I'll state it anyway.

Sadly the bigger singles names sell tickets, and it's all about money. Tough on the dibs guys, but I suspect that they know the score.

I'm not sure what the solution is, although at least it's a level playing field for all the dubs guys.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Helen40 wrote:
Spectator wrote:
More seriously, once again, I really don't like the way that the Masters series works for doubles. These tournaments are hugely significant for the true doubles pairings: at this stage, each one could make a significant difference to a team's chances to get to the O2 (which in turn has a huge potential impact on their rankings for the next year). The arbitrarily small draws - with eight byes - combined with the number of singles players in the draw makes it almost impossible for those just outside the top to catch up, which seems really problematic. At the very least, if you're going to let in all these singles interlopers, expand the draw!
I suspect most of us know the answer to that, but I'll state it anyway.
Sadly the bigger singles names sell tickets, and it's all about money. Tough on the dibs guys, but I suspect that they know the score.
I'm not sure what the solution is, although at least it's a level playing field for all the dubs guys.

But why don't they just include 8 more pairs and eliminate the byes ?

indiana · Tennis legend

I presume they can't really stop the "singles interlopers" if they are in on rankings ( singles ones - and there's a whole other discussion ).

But I agree a 24 pair draw combined with the singles interlopers is far too restrictive on the true doublers getting into Masters events. What were the rankings of the first doubles pair to miss out ? Must be pretty highly ranked.

Just at least get rid of the byes, and these will invariably be the true doublers ( since singles rankings do not count to seedings ) so you're not asking the poor singles stars to play any more tennis. No extra rounds, just 8 more matches. I'm struggling to see any issue with that.

-- Edited by indiana on Monday 10th of August 2015 10:06:01 PM