Week 46 - ATP World Tour Finals - London (Hard)

TMH · Futures qualifying

RE: Week 46 - ATP World Tour Finals - London (Hard)

Ratty · County player

philwrig wrote:
I think once Andy lost the 1st set, he did the right thing, no point digging really deep, with next week in mind.

17,500 people paid a lot of money to watch the match live, and Sky paid a lot of money to screen it. If players stop trying to win every match they play, that money will dry up, along with the popularity of pro tennis.

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

Ratty, I agree.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Ratty wrote:
philwrig wrote:
I think once Andy lost the 1st set, he did the right thing, no point digging really deep, with next week in mind.
17,500 people paid a lot of money to watch the match live, and Sky paid a lot of money to screen it. If players stop trying to win every match they play, that money will dry up, along with the popularity of pro tennis.

He did try to win the match, it's just it would have needed a huge effort to turn it around after losing the 1st, as a Sky subscriber I am quite happy for 1 week only that he competes in this way.

Spectator · All-time great

It's a rotten situation, this. I have no idea whatsoever what Mr Murray's thoughts were about the match and how they did or didn't affect his play. But I do feel he's been put in an untenable situation, and that it is the inability of tennis' ruling bodies to cooperate that has lead to such situations. If you're going to make this a key element of the season, then do something about the timings, especially vis a vis the Paris Masters and the Davis Cup. Otherwise there is far too great a risk of exhausted players or players who know that they have to conserve themselves for something vital the following week. And I'd agree - that's not good for professional tennis.

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

Just to make clear, I was agreeing with Ratty that the sport will suffer if players don't give their best efforts in such a flagship event, rather than suggesting Andy wasn't trying in this particular match. He looked uncomfortable physically to me at several points in the match and I wonder if he hasn't tweaked something that was stopping him really getting up for his serve.

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

Castle thought he was having a hamstring problem.

indiana · Tennis legend

They do have virtually a full week between the Paris Masters Final and the start of the World Tour Finals, after that silly year ( or two ? ) of going straight from the Paris Masters to the WTF, and then the Davis Cup Final is at the end of the following week.

I don't really see that as being so bad, especially if a player, as Andy has done, gives himself a light load going into these 3 events, while I accept one can question the overall season length.

To me its much more the hard to clay transition that is rather problematic rather than it being an unreasonable three tournament schedule. It's one a fit Andy ( and hopefully he is OK ) should be well capable of dealing with and most certainly at the time of his WTF second match ( plus more ).

He said himself last week that he was feeling great physically.

-- Edited by indiana on Wednesday 18th of November 2015 09:54:24 PM

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Really totally indifferent to the ATP World finals and I hope his mind is focused on Belgium and an opportunity to write some significant British tennis history.

Spectator · All-time great

I hope Mr Murray continues to be well. Somewhat alarmed by the thought he might be injured.

Indiana, I hear what you're saying, but Mr Murray felt fine physically coming in because he'd had a very light schedule coming into the Tour Final. For the players whose participation is uncertain (as his was last year), the last few weeks can be quite intense, to say the least. The lower-ranked players who are fighting for every point in the last tournaments could probably use more than a week to recover (especially given that it's not really a "free" week) - and can therefore be at a significant disadvantage even before you factor in that they're lower ranked for a reason. This may be one factor contributing to some of the trends others have noted.

As for the transition - my objection is that having the two events so close means that facing such a transition is eminently possible and indeed likely for at least one player ... and that there's a particularly strong possibility that one side only (as in this case) will be disadvantaged. There's also an issue of time zones: you can imagine a situation in which Argentina, say, which doesn't have anyone in the WTFs but could be a finalist, were playing the final at home on clay. A European opponent with a top 10 player would then come into the final tie with their top player potentially having to make a long journey, cope with jet lag, and shift surfaces within a week. Not good - and a system which allows for that as a possibility is one that to my mind rather needs some fixing.

NB: I feel more strongly about the latter than I do about the former. The one is within the control of the ATP and probably has to be accepted as just the way it is for scheduling reasons. The other is an issue around different bodies with different agendas ... and really rather should be tackled.

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 19th of November 2015 10:24:00 AM

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 19th of November 2015 10:52:53 AM

Ratty · County player

i have to say that I disagree.

The Davis Cup barely registers for anyone apart from diehard tennis geeks. That's not to say that it couldn't be as popular as, say, The Ryder Cup, if they sorted out the labyrinthine format and the timing (every 4 years would be fine), but until then it's an unwelcome distraction for the pros.

What the 250,000 people who pay to go to the O2, and Sky and their TV audience, want from the WTF is a showcase for the best 8 tennis players in the world. They will feel rightly insulted by players who often seem to be be too knackered to give a damn - and who are therefore showing an appalling lack of respect to the people who ultimately pay their wages. Maybe in the future they will be tempted to spend their money on something else.

indiana · Tennis legend

I certainly agree that in its current format, the Davis Cup every year doesn't really work.

Surely it's purpose is that the best win, but it's the best from these players that deign to assemble each year.

Switzerland for instance should clearly have had a cracking chance to retain the Cup this year, but Federer and Wawrinka weren't up for another full on campaign after last year's triumph, which is understandable particularly with Fed. Already many folk are speculating how much or little Andy will be involved next year so we could have another very hampered defense.

So really it is not particularly fit for purpose in current format. Ratty's every four years thoughts I think would be better, say reach agreement to have some of the Masters events take a break every 4 years if going to schedule through the season. There is much more of an issue than the final's scheduling where at least if still in the top players will appear

At the moment the very top pros seen to think one year of winning the Davis Cup, adding that to their CV and declaring their undying love for Spain / Serbia / Switzerland / GB whoever will generally do for them. They understandably have individual careers to be getting on with.

The ITF could really make the Davis Cup a very big thing with the best of the best, something that it is often not currently.

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 19th of November 2015 01:01:23 PM

Spectator · All-time great

How important the Davis Cup is v the World Tour Finals depends in part, I suspect, on the country in which you reside. The QF loss to England made the front pages of Le Monde; the World Tour Finals aren't even visible in the online sport section. Argentina would be similar, at a guess - as would some others.

I'd agree, though, that the constant treadmill of an annual competition, which means that you can win at the end of November and then face a WG I match a few months later, does no one any favours. Every four years seems a bit too long. But every two for the World Group would work nicely, with the other Group competitions continuing onwards below - and the feed-in from Group I to the WG taking place slightly differently. I do think that for the countries below the WG, it's often fine to keep going: the DC is often quite important there, as it's the only competition that is both theirs and part of something larger. And the top players don't often play in those groups, so the issues with the WTFs wouldn't arise.

Ratty · County player

Spectator wrote:
How important the Davis Cup is v the World Tour Finals depends in part, I suspect, on the country in which you reside.

I'm not so sure about that. In Britain, Wimbledon gets 40,000 paying customers per day, a huge TV audience, and wall-to-wall Press coverage. The Davis Cup SEMI-FINAL between GB and Australia was in a 5,000(?) seat venue, with minimal TV and Press.

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

The arguments around the transition between surfaces are valid and clearly are the main concern for Andy if he were to make the knockout stages and leave himself less time to get comfortable on the dirt before the DC matches start. This could easily have been alleviated as Rafa has suggested by rotating the surface for the WTF and playing on clay this year, something that the O2 could quite easily have done.

This would have the added benefit of not playing every WTF on slow indoor hard courts which kill all of the suspense by all but guaranteeing that Nole will win every year.