the addict wrote:

---

If you look at OER you can set the date to 11th July and see what their prediction is. Its currently showing Cam at 11, Dan at 39 and Andy at 63. Emma is at 10 after dropping 240 points. So no real changes.

No idea about doubles rankings though.

---

 So Emma could rise from 11 currently ? 

PaulM wrote:

---

Surely the problem with the WTA/ATP response is that it doesn't punish Wimbledon in any way at all (assuming that was the intent)? The players will still show up, so will the crowds and TV audiences, the prestige is still there even in tour terms it's strictly turned into an exhibition. The only people being punished are the players who will get no points and, depending on what Wimbledon decide to do, potentially a cut in prize money.

Freezing the points for RUS/BLR players seemed the obvious route with a warning of more severe sanctions if replicated.

I don't really see what the Tours think they have achieved here. If everyone still turns up to play in front of packed crowds Wimbledon and others will just shrug.

---

 This 

Ps I dont think Wimbledon will cut money - otherwise its a chase to the bottom and more foot shooting. They look better and ensure getting best field possible if they keep the money as planned. imho

nicofrance wrote:

---

Whats even more extraordinary in this affair is the government guidance only asks for a declaration that any player isnt funded by Putin, Russia or Belarus and will be neutral as in not making any pro Putin comments .

This type of declaration is hardly that controversial and I cant see how that would risk the players or their families safety .

---

 I don't think its even necessary, most of the Russian players AFAIK have said very little about the war.

Indiana I don't follow, the purpose of no points is to "sanction" Wimbledon for breach of the Tours anti-discrimination provisions and thereby, as you say, maintain the level playing field as it's secondary effect. It is designed intrinsically to be a punishment for breach of contract. Now for other events, 250s and so on it would probably be very effective at hurting the event, but the Tours have set a precedent by only stripping points when there are no comparable playing opportunities.

So what the Tours position does is (1) impact the event they are sanctioning in no way at all, because as you say it's Wimbledon and the lack of points won't impact the field, and (2) not acted as a disincentive to any other tournament doing something similar who can point to how Birmingham and Eastbourne are retaining their points despite breaching conditions (it may be the other unspecified sanctions the WTA talks about would be more problematic for a less rich association, but we don't know the details).

Now I actually think the Tours response was pretty much the only action they had available, so I understand it from that perspective. But it's totally ineffective in sending a message to Wimbledon or other events that may be considering similar action (US Open, apparently).

And because the tournament receiving the sanction is unaffected in any way, it is the case the Tours have made a decision that impacts noone other than the players. Now you might think that's fine, I'm fairly ambivalent about it, and it does ensure equal treatment which is core to the Tours foundations. But what's becoming clear is that the Tours didn't conduct any discussion with the players in advance (ironically lack of consultation being their complaint about AELTC and LTA).

So I'm not saying that removing points is wrong, and it achieves a level playing field which is one aim they had certainly, but it doesn't actually achieve anything in terms of a sanction on a tournament, or making an example that others won't dare follow. So to that end, it seems even if it was all they really could do, a bit shallow and dare I say, pointless? Particularly if all that happens is relations between players and tour management are soured, and there were other ways to protect the level playing field in practice for all intents and purposes.

I think we are basically in the same place but just differ on whether the Tours are primarily protecting the level playing field by punishing the tournament, or punishing the tournament to protect the level field. Which all ends up in the same place really. (Punish might not be the right word but you know what I mean)

-- Edited by PaulM on Sunday 22nd of May 2022 12:52:45 PM

So in effect Wimbledon did not have to make this decision as the players could easily have signed the declaration without fear of any repercussions.

The fear of Royalty handing out a trophy to a possible Russian or Belarussian should not have been a reason for the course of action taken , they could have just got an official at Wimbledon to do this if it actually happened .

Wimbledon has taken upon itself to be some moral champion and could have avoided all this as the ATP and WTA were willing to work towards a solution together .

As much as I disagree with the points being stripped from the tournament the AELTC have acted with a lot of hubris and arrogance thinking that they could get away with this without sanctions.