Live Scores  |  TV Schedule  |  Video  |  Pro Schedule  |  Rankings  |  Players  |  Stats  |  Message Boards  |  Blogs Subscribe  |  Store
TENNIS.com - Travelling Circus - Compass and Roadmap
   Features
   Backcourt  
   Instruction
   Gear
   Fitness
   Community
   Travel
   Classifieds
TENNIS.com Blogs
   TennisWorld
   Concrete Elbow
   String Theory
   The Healthy Player
   The Pro Shop
   Backcourt: Framed
   ATP Fantasy Blog
  
  
  
  
  
  
TENNIS Magazine
   Gift Subscription
   Purchase Back Issues
   Current Issue
   Past Issues
   Customer Care
« Tag Team Long Time, No See »
Compass and Roadmap
Posted 03/28/2007 @ 7 :22 AM

2007_03_27_wtacalendar3_blog The WTA made its Roadmap 2010 (2009) announcement in Miami on Tuesday. The statements were fairly general, so here’s a quick breakdown incorporating some of the other details as well as comments made by officials during and after the presentation:

New calendar

The Tour released a list of the planned top-level events in 2009, conveniently listing them by geography and alphabetical so the exact dates and tournament levels aren’t clear.

On the right is a ‘best guess’ at what the calendar will look like - this could be updated through the day if other details become known. The off-season will be nine weeks starting at the end of October; other than that, it's not radically different from what exists now.

The Tour’s original goal was to divide the circuit into two sets of very distinct higher- and lower-level events, but objections from the USTA and possibly elsewhere resulted in a compromise that will essentially see the current Tier I – V structure become a four-tier structure: three levels where top players compete ($4 million-$600,000) and a fourth 'B' level (not yet annouced) where very few if any of the top 10 - or even top 20 - compete.

- four mandatory events – Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid and Beijing. The first two will be 12 days they are now, and the other two will be nine days.

Madrid will be during the clay season as speculated, and eventually    combined with the men if the impasse over the ATP clay season is resolved. Beijing is brand new at this level, and is rumored to have ‘outbid’ Shanghai which was probably earmarked for the event.

The men announced a Masters Series event in Shanghai at the same time, and the tours are planning to co-ordinate the timing of both events somehow – same week, consecutive weeks, alternating venues, etc. (No press conference from the ATP, though, just as there wasn’t one when the decision to scrap round-robin was announced. Don’t be shy, guys...)

- five seven-day, non-mandatory events with a majority of the top 10 playing – these are almost definitely Dubai, Rome, Toronto, Cincinnati and probably Moscow, but not officially specified.

- 11 events with a few of the top 10 – these include the events the week before the Grand Slams, which can have more top players than the others.

Misc.: Zurich is, not surprisingly, not on the list – the tournament was already financially stretched and thinking about cutting back. San Diego may be revived in some form. Current Tier IIs not on this premium list are Antwerp, Amelia Island, Warsaw, Luxembourg and Linz.

The original, rather curious idea of having a secondary year-end championships for players who didn’t get into the real one is apparently still out there, but nothing specific has been worked out. Hard to see players getting psyched to play it if it happens.

Player suspensions

Players who miss mandatory events or tournament commitments at the next level down could be suspended from the next two top-level tournaments.

WTA execs said the exact rules are still being worked out, which is probably code for 'the disagreements continue.' To wit – Maria Sharapova after her match on Tuesday: “It's something that is very concerning at the moment, and there are a lot of buts and ifs, so we're definitely in the talks.” Does she think the proposed penalties too harsh? “With the way it is set right now, yes, I do.”

The big question here centers around the Williams sisters, who would be suspended from Miami if they continued not to play Indian Wells. Is the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour really going to stop two of its biggest stars from playing in the Sony Ericsson Open?

Larry Scott (WTA CEO): “There will be no exceptions for individual player circumstances... Having said that, I'm very sensitive to some of the concerns that Venus and Serena have had with Indian Wells. I've discussed this with both of them, and I think they understand that we can't design a system around individual issues that players have.”

Serena Williams after her match on Tuesday: “I haven't had a chance to talk to Larry about it. I've been here every day, and we're supposed to have a sit down and have a powwow about it, but I haven't had a chance. So I look forward to talking to him at least an hour about it so I can be updated with everything. I don't want to make any comments until I'm knowledgeable about it.”

The way out of this one may lie in an appeals process that's still being worked out but could delay or avert the suspension.

Henin, who was at the WTA press conference, said the streamlined calendar would make it easier for players to keep their commitments, and the shortened season was a big victory that would encourage players to do what the tour is asking.

One note: in a sense, the whole Roadmap hinges on player commitments being met. The tournaments are being asked to come up with a lot of prize money, and if they don’t get their promised fields the whole thing will likely fall apart. But given the way the last few years have played out with the players getting injured or deciding to take a break, its going to be a tough challenge for the tour.

Prize money/Revenue sharing

Total WTA prize money is scheduled to go up 30% between 2008 and 2009. A big jump, and the four mandatory events will all have prize money equal to the men’s events. That comes after Wimbledon and the French Open announced just a few weeks ago that they will be paying equal prize money, meaning that all four Grand Slams now do so.

Not many details on the revenue sharing, but the idea is that there will be a formula that results in prize money going up as a tournament’s revenues go up, with the 2009 prize money being the minimum level. (There's an odd detail attached to this but that will have to wait till it's more clear what it means.)

Push into China

In addition to the mandatory event in Beijing, the WTA will also be opening an Asia-Pacific office there next year.

The big commitments made to China by both tours, along with growing focus on Doha and Dubai, generated a lot of discussion about the social implications that go along with this. It's unlikely to make a difference to what’s decided, but will - and should - continue to be a talking point.

And now, a word from our sponsor

The company’s head of marketing was also at the press conference:

“We believed when we came into this sport that the sport needed reforms in terms of making it attractive to the younger users, who are the primary consumers of cell phones. We also needed to attract more new sponsors to the sport. So on behalf of the other sponsors, we see this very positively. 

... The other great thing is the growth of tennis in China. China is an important market for our business and for businesses around the world, and it's great news that Sony Ericsson WTA Tour will be making a positive move towards improving its footprint in China.

... I think we went into women's tennis specifically because of the passion and innovation that we saw in women's tennis.  I think today's roadmap is a good indication of that innovation that we have asked for, and that women's tennis has demonstrated throughout its history.

We also wanted to make sure that women's tennis had a global footprint, and I think that was one of the things that we have seen for the past few years: The extension of a global footprint in the market where we see emerging audiences.

So that's very exciting for us. And obviously I think that women's tennis has this amazing ability to travel many fields, not just the field of tennis but fields of entertainment, fashion, music, and this is one of the things that is attractive for a brand like ours in the mobile entertainment space."

Refresh my memory: Sony Ericsson struck a sponsorship deal with the WTA, not an acquisition deal, right? Post answers below or just call from your mobile entertainment space.

| | Send to a Friend
Comments

Gosh Kamakshi - how long did you stay up last night to finish up all this writing! I must admit I had to read it twice to digest all this info.Good job. Liked your feature on Federer too.

kamakshi -- that was great.

I wonder what this will mean for the ASB Classic in Auckland, a tier IV tournament traditionally played two weeks before the Aussie Open?

The tournament organizers have worked really hard to keep this event alive, even changing the surface some years ago to Rebound Ace so that it can be marketed as a warm up to the AO. It is New Zealand's only WTA Tour event, so it's the only opportunity tennis fans here have to see the players in person.

Thanks tennismaniac, Dan.

doowaadaddynz -- Here's some info on Auckland, which will still take place but be part of the 'B' tier:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/4/story.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10430127

Hey Kamakshi, I know you from your guest writes at Steve, and today's post was no different in quality. Informative. I have to agree with Shriekie, sounds too harsh the way it is now. Actually the only good change I see in it right now is the longer break. I don't think you went into much detail about what you personally thought of it. How about it?

Eddy - I thought the original plans were a bit too drastic to be implemented so suddenly and too soon. It would have been bascially two levels of tournaments: (Grand Slams + 14 big WTA events) and (smaller events that top players would only be allowed to play two of). For a long time, the tour has been on board with relying on star to sell tickets, and would have suddenly cut off most of its tournaments from the life support system that it's itself played a role in creating.

The current calendar being proposed seems workable enough -- broadly, it's not that different from what exists now. It'll probably be similar to what the men went through with the Masters Series -- it's just a question of whether you think the added coherence and strength at the top level is worth it, or whether you think the smaller events get hurt too much.

I don't like the idea of player suspensions, just because historically the right of players to play when and where they want was a hard-earned one.

If I have a concern about the Roadmap, it's this: the tournaments are being asked to raise the financial stakes quite a bit, in return for the tour promising that the top players will show up and allow them to recoup the added investment. With the way things are at the moment with injuries and variosu personal issues, I don't know if the tour can really live up to all of those promises. And then what happens to the tournaments to put up the cash? And if they start to sink, what happens to the calendar?

So it's a gamble. We'll see how it works out.

Wow, sounds complicated now, and I'm still not sure I understand it. I do know I like the ATP's system much more(though I think Masters should be reduced to 7) and I don't think the WTA would go wrong to emulate it more strongly. A successful system should be easily understood by the fans, anyway.
I can see this proposed system is really going to hurt the Williams sisters. So there are 4 Masters-like events players must attend and they get suspended for not attending the last one...how contradictory when the whole point of these events is to bring the top players together. It's like punishing a player for getting punished...like killing a man who's already in prison.
And I'm not for them killing off the smaller tournaments for the sake of the bigger ones. For example, Antwerp (I think), where Momo won the diamond racquet. Could the tournament still afford that racquet and pay the same prize money under these new rules? I see the tournament is not even on the map so I would think not.
No, I don't think the system is better; but you're right, it's mostly just different. I hope they're not trying to be different for its own sake. The suspension rule sounds horrible. The longer break during the off-season is nice though, and it still looks to me like the only significantly positive change.

Now, if they could just drop on-court coaching and the challenge system (that's not happening) I'd be happy...
Looking forward to next post/comment Kamakshi.

Oh, in the past, did countries' tennis federations decide which tournaments their players would play?

Yea, putting a bunch of money in fewer tournaments sounds dangerous--especially if, as you pointed out, players don't show up. And it seems to me like under this new system we will see the top players more frequently at various smaller tournaments, but they will all get together less often at the fewer-in-number big ones.
Man, after all these years tennis is nowhere near perfecting its yearly schedule. Kind of sad when you consider the other sports. No wonder they need star power to bring in revenue.

Eddy -- "under this new system we will see the top players more frequently at various smaller tournaments, but they will all get together less often at the fewer-in-number big ones"... actually, it should be just the opposite. The top players should meet more often at the bigger events under the new structure (that's the whole idea).

Historically, national federations/the ITF exercised much more control over where players played -- sometimes even things like which players from the country would go to Wimbledon. One of the big turning points was Nikki Pilic not being allowed to play Wimbledon in 1973 after he decided to skip a Davis Cup tie -- the majority of his fellow players (acting collectively through the recently-formed ATP) boycotted Wimbledon in protest.

I don't think it's fair or WISE to threaten suspensions of the game's top players if they decide - for reasons of their own, to skip a tour. This sounds similar to what's going on in another sport(hint: changing the basketball without the input of the players that use it) where there seems to be a "power surge" amongst those controlling the game. I would not buy a ticket to see the "head" of the WTA play tennis.
Just because you CAN change the rules doesn't mean you SHOULD.

As a black fan, and a devout fan about Serena and Venus Williams, yeah, that incident was ugly in Indian Wells. But that is nothing what Jackie Robinson or Larry Doby went through back in the 40's and 50's

In fact, she never was called an explicit word in that match unlike that idiot of a fan this week in Miami in that final aganist Cijsters (when it was still called the Newsweek). Now, unless someone in the crowd did that constantly, then I have to say that they have overexasperated the situation, and it hurt Venus this week aganist Sharapova. She was rusty after losing momentum in winning Memphis, and really would have been helped in playing Indian Wells.

Now, in regards to this sometimes ok but utter piece of crap from Sony ericsson on the Tour that it basically has total dominion on, this just shows how you should never have a company own your sports league or association (or control it). It's irrelvant BS like "we came into this sport that the sport needed reforms in terms of making it attractive to the younger users, who are the primary consumers of cell phones," that have you saying, what? That has nothing to do with tennis, you don't see Mercedes Benz saying, "we wanted to display our signs at the net to entice young consumers to get that nice new CLK, do you?"

And don't get me started on this "elite events and the next events thing". Why is the WTA tour so stubborn in not trying to follow the men. You tried your bit at individuality (wih schedule and rankings) and it has failed. Just follow the ATP and how it handles the Masters-Series and there you go.

great job by the way Kamakshi

Kamakshi, let me try to get this straight. The point is the have the top players play each other more often, but play the lower-ranked players less often? So this would effectively turn the WTA into the major leagues of tennis, with upcoming players having to fight their way from playing the fourth level (56/32) tournaments?

So on that map, top players must go to the first three levels of the roadmap, but can go to a few of any of the tournaments of the fourth level they choose?

Well, to speak of the IW incident, the crowd had every right to boo the sisters, though it shouldn't have (freedom of speech). I think the sisters shouldn't skip IW if they were just booed although they have every right to. But it's not because the treatment they received wasn't bad compared to what blacks used to face, since: 1)you'd have to show there was racism involved (correct me if there was, because that would be important), 2)it doesn't matter how severe the racism is, if it was there it should be stopped. I think that simply because they should be able to skip any tournament they want for whatever reason...even for a stupid reason or a disillusioned perspective (not that I'm saying their reason is stupid, because I did not experience what they claim).
And after years of skipping it, they've put themselves in a situation where it would be embarassing to agree to return to IW, and I think that may play a role in their decision not to go in the future. But, of course, since there is no evidence it was racially motivated (and if you're right and the crowd never used racial slurs) the sisters should not be exempted from playing IW or exempted for that suspension rule. With that said, I don't think that suspension rule should be put in place anyway.

Missing a tournament is its own punishment i.e. the ranking points, the fact that it's frustrating to be injured when everyone else can play (if that happens to be the reason), the prize money. If the Williams sisters, or any players, choose to skip IW or other tournaments those are the only punishments they should have to face. I think it's good to automatically sign players up for the most important tournaments but bad to fine them or suspend them if they have to pull out for some reason. I think it would be okay to fine a player for pulling out of a tournament they entered (to make up for pre-tournament advertising or whatnot), but not for pulling out of a tournament they were automatically entered in.

Eddy -- the planned requirements for top ten players are the four Slams, the four mandatory events, four of the $2 million tournaments, and two $700,000-$600,000 tournaments. These include all the tournaments listed above.

Below that are 'B' tournaments (not announced yet), which top players can only enter through wild cards and there are limits on how many they can play.

Thanks, that helped a lot. I was completely lost on that. I see that except for the 56/32 tournaments they the players don't have much to pick from. I guess this would lead to top matches more often then...but it's needlessly more complicated than the system in place now (especially compared to ATP).

Post a Comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In


  * Only required field   

  (Optional)

  (Optional)

« Tag Team Long Time, No See »

More from TennisWorld
Concrete Elbow by Steve Tignor

More from Concrete Elbow
TENNIS Magazine is published 10 times per year.




Save 75% off of the annual newsstand price.
Categories
Australian Open 2007
Australian Open 2008
Davis Cup 2007
French Open 2007
french Open 2008
Indian Wells 2007
Key Biscayne 2007
Las Vegas 2007
San Jose 2007
Toronto 2007
Toronto 2008
Wimbledon 2007
Wimbledon 2008
Recent Entries
Toronto: Rafa Reigns
Toronto: A Tale of Two Tiebreaks
Toronto: Simon Says
Toronto: Rafa's Take
Toronto: Waiting in the Wings Now
Toronto: Roger and the Monster
Toronto: Doubles the Fun
Toronto: Roddick's Resolution
Toronto: The Tournament After the Final Before
Wimbledon: Departure Lounge diary
Statistics
This blog currently has 114 entries and 2878 comments.