Week 7 - WTA International ($227K) - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Clay

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

RE: Week 7 - WTA International ($227K) - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Clay

paulisi · Tennis legend

Jaggy1876 wrote:
Don't mean to be negative here but Tara won 2 sets and a couple of MTBs to get to a doubles final. In my opinion MTBs make doubles even more of a lottery than doubles already is so I won't be drawing any great conclusion here. I'd rather like to congratulate Tara and Conny in spotting a good way of making some decent money as a warm up for their 3 weeks of 25ks where they will be having to qualify for singles.

Totally agree. Nice money earned, weak tournament.

indiana · Tennis legend

Certain amount of truth in that, but they coped well in the environment and in these MTBs and hung in there very well in the final.

Be interesting to see how their doubles progresses over the months ahead assuming ( as I would imagine likely ) they continue to be doubles partners.

PS : I have never really seen first to 10 with a 2 point lead to decide a match as a lottery. It sorts out winners from losers over a very extended game, and I am fairly sure the better on paper players win the great majority of them. Yes, in isolation, I would prefer full final sets, but I do understand how MTBs help scheduling and can sometimes help give doubles more coverage, It's no Ad that I very much dislike, fundamentally changing a great aspect of the tennis scoring system and psychology within it.

-- Edited by indiana on Sunday 21st of February 2016 03:35:10 PM

insomniacfolder · Challenger level

paulisi wrote:
Jaggy1876 wrote:
Don't mean to be negative here but Tara won 2 sets and a couple of MTBs to get to a doubles final. In my opinion MTBs make doubles even more of a lottery than doubles already is so I won't be drawing any great conclusion here. I'd rather like to congratulate Tara and Conny in spotting a good way of making some decent money as a warm up for their 3 weeks of 25ks where they will be having to qualify for singles.
Totally agree. Nice money earned, weak tournament.

It's about a strong as these sorts of Internationals ever are: in the wake of a GS in the global showcase weeks of the tour, as players scatter far and wide, the bigger names ration their schedules, and rarely play at this level. More often than not there isn't a top 20 player in sight. Something like Acapulco next week - with Vika, Madison Keys, Sloane, and 7 top 40 players - is characterised not by it's strength, but by how much of a complete outlier as an international because of it's oversubscription.
Some weeks, some locations, are stronger than others; Baku & Kuala Lumpur because of location, requiring a long journey with no obvious lead in or lead out travel itinerary to linking tournaments effectively mean writing off 2-3 weeks to compete at full capacity once, something that most players, especially top players, aren't willing to do, and so they have a weaker field than other comparable events.
This Rio event is a bit like that, in that the top players, even those preferring clay, will chose the fortnight in the Premier events in the Middle East a short distance from each other and more points in offer. An international run parallel to a Premier, such as this always suffers, almost be necessity.

Suggesting that they only 'won 2 sets and a couple of MTBs to get to a doubles final' (they didn't, they won 3 sets and an MTB, but I take the general point) along with the indication that this is was a weak tournament seems to suggest that these matches were in some way easy, and thus dispensable and inconsequential, and can, perhaps even should, just be written off as a freak of chance and scheduling.
I can understand that inclination, but wholeheartedly disagree with it.
There are many players for whom these weeks and the International events of them, are their bread and butter, this is their level, what they make their living from, and so although the draws are at the level expected, that's in no way to suggest that the matches are therefore easy or less hard fought. The players that enter give of their best and each achievement still has to be earned in full. Even if Tara and Conny did get a soft draw, a soft draw in an International would still be, for them, massively punching about their weight based on what they have achieved in their careers to date.
Tara has 4 $25K doubles titles, and one singles at the same level, nothing above that to date. Conny, 18 months older, has best results of 7 $25K doubles titles and one $25K singles. Nothing there suggests that even if this were a soft draw that they would be reasonably expected to compete. Especially not in the QF match against Erakovic and Soler-Espinosa, both of whom have at least one WTA doubles title, and have been top 50 singles - Marina has multiple doubles and a singles on the WTA. Tara & Conny managed to win that match after suffering a second set bagel, and yet still managed to guts out a win against the odds and momentum to scrape through that MTB. That deserves, for my part, respect, celebration and admiration.

I agree that MTBs and no advantage games have somewhat increased variability in doubles, and, as expressed elsewhere, would prefer just to have the 'proper' scoring system back. It's been in place long enough now though that there's no surprise to it, you know what you're getting, and should be prepared to play to the strengths of the format. The playing field is known and equal to all. It also doesn't seem to stop Santina or the other top teams routinely winning just as many matches under this system as you would expect in the old format. It doesn't, in short, put an asterisk beside the 'W'.

Now, I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone would suggest that the results here mean that Tara & Conny are going to quit singles to specialise in doubles and aim to overthrow Santina by years end! It' not a world shattering thunderbolt to the doubles tennis establishment, but it is good, heartening, and a full and un-asterisked well done to them.

This leads me on (oh God! they're still rattling on! 'Fraid so!) to a point I made obliquely elsewhere, about the devaluation of tennis by those most invested in it. My love/hate relationship with Ben Rothenberg & Courtney Nguyen, where they spend much time each week writing off almost the entire tennis schedules and almost all of it's participants as 'irrelevant'. Just as here, where the summation is - nice event, don't mean nothing. Ben & Courtney (B&C) routinely, week in, week out, on their popular podcast, 'No Challenges Remaining', discuss everything below the top 2 or 3 players of each tour as, effectively irrelevant, their not going to win GS, so no one really cares. They state, it's a 'nice' win for whoever had achieved that week, but, again, no one really cares.
The supposed champions of our game whose livelihoods depend upon it, Ms. Nguyen, in her other role, is even now an official mouthpiece for the WTA as their, 'WTA Insider' columnist. These champions, who you might hope are meant to most ardently proselytise the virtues of the game to the unconverted are systematically conveying the message that, if you're not paying attention, well, that's OK, because nothing interesting, nothing relevant is happening anyway - the big 6 players in the world haven't won - nothing to see here, move along. That infuriates me. There's so much of the glory the triumph, disaster and rich tapestry of life played out each week in the theatre of tennis, it's not just at the Grand Slams. I'd hope that B&C realise this rather than being so reductive.

The real kicker here though was after the US Open ladies final last year. Vinci had beaten Serena - something that even by B&C reckoning was relevant! - and there was a fear that the final would be a massive anti-climax, particularly for American's with no calendar Grand Slam now at stake. Of course it didn't turn out that way, it was a good final, and Vinci charmed the socks off the States. After that, B&C commented at length about how many people were coming up to them and saying how great they thought tennis was, and how surprised they were about how entertaining it was.
And then...
B&C said, well, yeah, we're here all year round you know, it's a long season, we don't only exist 4 times a year, and wouldn't it be great if more people paid attention year round.
Well yes, it would.
Perhaps tough they'd been listening to you all year and for some reason got the idea that the rest of the season just wasn't 'relevant'!

Even if no one reads it all I feel unburdened.
Phew!

vohor · Grand Slam Champion

Well said ISF :D :D

indiana · Tennis legend

W0w, great post, ISF. I read it, I read it all

LordBrownof · Futures level

insomniacfolder wrote:
paulisi wrote:
Jaggy1876 wrote:
Don't mean to be negative here but Tara won 2 sets and a couple of MTBs to get to a doubles final. In my opinion MTBs make doubles even more of a lottery than doubles already is so I won't be drawing any great conclusion here. I'd rather like to congratulate Tara and Conny in spotting a good way of making some decent money as a warm up for their 3 weeks of 25ks where they will be having to qualify for singles.
Totally agree. Nice money earned, weak tournament.
It's about a strong as these sorts of Internationals ever are: in the wake of a GS in the global showcase weeks of the tour, as players scatter far and wide, the bigger names ration their schedules, and rarely play at this level. More often than not there isn't a top 20 player in sight. Something like Acapulco next week - with Vika, Madison Keys, Sloane, and 7 top 40 players - is characterised not by it's strength, but by how much of a complete outlier as an international because of it's oversubscription.
Some weeks, some locations, are stronger than others; Baku & Kuala Lumpur because of location, requiring a long journey with no obvious lead in or lead out travel itinerary to linking tournaments effectively mean writing off 2-3 weeks to compete at full capacity once, something that most players, especially top players, aren't willing to do, and so they have a weaker field than other comparable events.
This Rio event is a bit like that, in that the top players, even those preferring clay, will chose the fortnight in the Premier events in the Middle East a short distance from each other and more points in offer. An international run parallel to a Premier, such as this always suffers, almost be necessity.

Suggesting that they only 'won 2 sets and a couple of MTBs to get to a doubles final' (they didn't, they won 3 sets and an MTB, but I take the general point) along with the indication that this is was a weak tournament seems to suggest that these matches were in some way easy, and thus dispensable and inconsequential, and can, perhaps even should, just be written off as a freak of chance and scheduling.
I can understand that inclination, but wholeheartedly disagree with it.
There are many players for whom these weeks and the International events of them, are their bread and butter, this is their level, what they make their living from, and so although the draws are at the level expected, that's in no way to suggest that the matches are therefore easy or less hard fought. The players that enter give of their best and each achievement still has to be earned in full. Even if Tara and Conny did get a soft draw, a soft draw in an International would still be, for them, massively punching about their weight based on what they have achieved in their careers to date.
Tara has 4 $25K doubles titles, and one singles at the same level, nothing above that to date. Conny, 18 months older, has best results of 7 $25K doubles titles and one $25K singles. Nothing there suggests that even if this were a soft draw that they would be reasonably expected to compete. Especially not in the QF match against Erakovic and Soler-Espinosa, both of whom have at least one WTA doubles title, and have been top 50 singles - Marina has multiple doubles and a singles on the WTA. Tara & Conny managed to win that match after suffering a second set bagel, and yet still managed to guts out a win against the odds and momentum to scrape through that MTB. That deserves, for my part, respect, celebration and admiration.

I agree that MTBs and no advantage games have somewhat increased variability in doubles, and, as expressed elsewhere, would prefer just to have the 'proper' scoring system back. It's been in place long enough now though that there's no surprise to it, you know what you're getting, and should be prepared to play to the strengths of the format. The playing field is known and equal to all. It also doesn't seem to stop Santina or the other top teams routinely winning just as many matches under this system as you would expect in the old format. It doesn't, in short, put an asterisk beside the 'W'.

Now, I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone would suggest that the results here mean that Tara & Conny are going to quit singles to specialise in doubles and aim to overthrow Santina by years end! It' not a world shattering thunderbolt to the doubles tennis establishment, but it is good, heartening, and a full and un-asterisked well done to them.

This leads me on (oh God! they're still rattling on! 'Fraid so!) to a point I made obliquely elsewhere, about the devaluation of tennis by those most invested in it. My love/hate relationship with Ben Rothenberg & Courtney Nguyen, where they spend much time each week writing off almost the entire tennis schedules and almost all of it's participants as 'irrelevant'. Just as here, where the summation is - nice event, don't mean nothing. Ben & Courtney (B&C) routinely, week in, week out, on their popular podcast, 'No Challenges Remaining', discuss everything below the top 2 or 3 players of each tour as, effectively irrelevant, their not going to win GS, so no one really cares. They state, it's a 'nice' win for whoever had achieved that week, but, again, no one really cares.
The supposed champions of our game whose livelihoods depend upon it, Ms. Nguyen, in her other role, is even now an official mouthpiece for the WTA as their, 'WTA Insider' columnist. These champions, who you might hope are meant to most ardently proselytise the virtues of the game to the unconverted are systematically conveying the message that, if you're not paying attention, well, that's OK, because nothing interesting, nothing relevant is happening anyway - the big 6 players in the world haven't won - nothing to see here, move along. That infuriates me. There's so much of the glory the triumph, disaster and rich tapestry of life played out each week in the theatre of tennis, it's not just at the Grand Slams. I'd hope that B&C realise this rather than being so reductive.

The real kicker here though was after the US Open ladies final last year. Vinci had beaten Serena - something that even by B&C reckoning was relevant! - and there was a fear that the final would be a massive anti-climax, particularly for American's with no calendar Grand Slam now at stake. Of course it didn't turn out that way, it was a good final, and Vinci charmed the socks off the States. After that, B&C commented at length about how many people were coming up to them and saying how great they thought tennis was, and how surprised they were about how entertaining it was.
And then...
B&C said, well, yeah, we're here all year round you know, it's a long season, we don't only exist 4 times a year, and wouldn't it be great if more people paid attention year round.
Well yes, it would.
Perhaps tough they'd been listening to you all year and for some reason got the idea that the rest of the season just wasn't 'relevant'!

Even if no one reads it all I feel unburdened.
Phew!

Love B&C personally but couldn't agree more with you on "relevancy".

insomniacfolder · Challenger level

LordBrownof wrote:
[...]
Love B&C personally but couldn't agree more with you on "relevancy".

I do listen every week, and not just out of frustration! They do some very good pieces, and their part in things like the Neil Harman affair was invaluable.
I often get the impression though that what they really like is 'drama' more than tennis.
By their own confession, they like the feuds and the plotting more than the backhands and forehands.
I think what they'd ideally want is a tennis reality show; the 'Real Court Stars of the WTA', as it were. Where every match was Putintseva vs. Niculescu, preferably with Poots, after a loss, dragging Monica off court by her hair, pulling out a pair of scissors, screaming, 'SLICE THIS!' and chopping all Monica's hair off.
I think B&C would be all over that!

Strongbow · All-time great

Glad to see they are getting some coverage here! Not much elsewhere - the money/points will be useful - nothing on the Beeb for a WTA final !!

Sic transit gloria mundi wink

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

Good post ISF I agree with a lot of that. And despite my reservations about the quality and randomness of Doubles with MTBs I would never begrudge Tara the cash earned here half of which will probably cover the month in Brazil puts it even more in perspective. Lack of media is certainly a shame. The BBC really are shocking how poor their tennis coverage is when you consider the amount of overkill they put into Wimbledon.

wimdledont · Challenger level

Very much agreed, ISF.

Tara+ may have been lucky to make the final, but there are hondreds of examples of players getting a good result due to a walkover, or other stroke of luck. Hope they can now ride their luck, and use their new rating to get some further entries to WTAs, or get seeded at ITF level, and consolidate or improve on their new status.

Also, it could give Tara the chance to try to move from ITF 25k singles qualies to WTA qualies.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

We have Billy living in a transit (admittedly with a five star laundry delivery service) and others moaning about soft points facilitating girls who are amongst the top 500ish best players on the planet feeding themselves and staying on tour. This tournament is relavent in a number of ways.

The annual salaries of players outside the top 200 probably don't get close to that of an NP2 footballer.

More pertinently we have to address our myopia. There is also a necessitity to grow the game globally and the field reflects the quality of the local talent who again are hardly flush for cash.

wimdledont · Challenger level

Impressed that Tara has tweeted her congratulations for winning the title to Schiavone+.

My congratulations to her on a new CH of WR172.