Murray Complaining

[GameSetAndMath]

Murray is complaining about giving inside track to GS winners in WTF tourney.

For those who are unaware, a player who wins a Grandslam, but fails to place in the
top 8, is automatically given berth in WTF tournament provided the said player finishes
in top 20. This is the rule against which Murray is complaining.

For those unaware of history, about 10 years or so ago, there used to be two end of
year tournaments, one run by ATP (the actual name of the tourney was constantly
changing) and the other run by ITF.

The ITF tourney was called Grand Slam Cup and they invite all GS winners of that
year and throw in a few wild cards as well. They pay a lot of money.

The name of the ATP year end event kept changing constantly, but it was basically
strictly as per the ATP rankings and the the top 8 were invited to play. If someone were
not available (say for example due to playing in GS cup), they went down the list
as needed, but no wild card business.

Since they were cutting into each others market, they finally came to senses
and combine their events into one single event. At that time, the rules were formed
as described in the second para. Also, only one GS winner is allowed to use the
inside route, even if multiple are eligible. The highest ranked GS winner who did
not finish in top 8, gets the inside track slot.

I don't see anything wrong with the system.

 

[Fiero425]

Murray is complaining about giving inside
track to GS winners in WTF tourney.

For those who are unaware, a player who wins a Grandslam, but fails to place in the
top 8, is automatically given berth in WTF tournament provided the said player finishes
in top 20. This is the rule against which Murray is complaining.

For those unaware of history, about 10 years or so ago, there used to two end of
year tournaments, one run by ATP (the actual name of the tourney was constantly
changing) and the other run by ITF.

The ITF tourney was called Grand Slam Cup and they invite all GS winners of that
year and throw in a few wild cards as well. They pay a lot of money.

The name of the ATP year end event kept changing constantly, but it was basically
strictly as per the ATP rankings and the the top 8 were invited to play. If someone were
not available (say for example due to playing in GS cup), they went down the list
as needed, but no wild card business.

Since they were cutting into each others market, they finally came to senses
and combine their events into one single event. At that time, the rules were formed
as described in the second para. Also, only one GS winner is allowed to use the]
inside route, even if multiple are eligible. The highest ranked GS winner who did
not finish in top 8, gets the inside track slot.

I don't see anything wrong with the system.

I thought it ridiculous to have 2 YE tourneys! I didn't pay too much attention to the GS Cup; I think the draw may have been 12 players! I know they manipulated the format and formula many times going back to Lendl v Connors when it was blatantly obvious Ivan lost RR match to Jimmy so he wouldn't have to play BORG until the final! Borg had defaulted a match due to the FLU, IIRC, giving him a 2-1 record! If Lendl had beaten Connors, he would have been 3-0 and no one wanted to play Borg in those final years! I still remember Connors shaking his fist at Lendl for meandering into the net and losing points! He wasn't happy, but he couldn't do the same thing! Totally classless, but Lendl was from Czechoslovakia!

 

[Kieran]

:laydownlaughing

Well done, Fiero, totally on topic!

 

[brokenshoelace]

Murray is complaining about giving inside
track to GS winners in WTF tourney.

For those who are unaware, a player who wins a Grandslam, but fails to place in the
top 8, is automatically given berth in WTF tournament provided the said player finishes
in top 20. This is the rule against which Murray is complaining.

For those unaware of history, about 10 years or so ago, there used to two end of
year tournaments, one run by ATP (the actual name of the tourney was constantly
changing) and the other run by ITF.

The ITF tourney was called Grand Slam Cup and they invite all GS winners of that
year and throw in a few wild cards as well. They pay a lot of money.

The name of the ATP year end event kept changing constantly, but it was basically
strictly as per the ATP rankings and the the top 8 were invited to play. If someone were
not available (say for example due to playing in GS cup), they went down the list
as needed, but no wild card business.

Since they were cutting into each others market, they finally came to senses
and combine their events into one single event. At that time, the rules were formed
as described in the second para. Also, only one GS winner is allowed to use the]
inside route, even if multiple are eligible. The highest ranked GS winner who did
not finish in top 8, gets the inside track slot.

I don't see anything wrong with the system.

I thought it ridiculous to have 2 YE tourneys! I didn't pay too much attention to the GS Cup; I think the draw may have been 12 players! I know they manipulated the format and formula many times going back to Lendl v Connors when it was blatantly obvious Ivan lost RR match to Jimmy so he wouldn't have to play BORG until the final! Borg had defaulted a match due to the FLU, IIRC, giving him a 2-1 record! If Lendl had beaten Connors, he would have been 3-0 and no one wanted to play Borg in those final years! I still remember Connors shaking his fist at Lendl for meandering into the net and losing points! He wasn't happy, but he couldn't do the same thing! Totally classless, but Lendl was from Czechoslovakia!

What did I just read?

 

[Fiero425]

Murray is complaining about giving inside
track to GS winners in WTF tourney.

For those who are unaware, a player who wins a Grandslam, but fails to place in the
top 8, is automatically given berth in WTF tournament provided the said player finishes
in top 20. This is the rule against which Murray is complaining.

For those unaware of history, about 10 years or so ago, there used to two end of
year tournaments, one run by ATP (the actual name of the tourney was constantly
changing) and the other run by ITF.

The ITF tourney was called Grand Slam Cup and they invite all GS winners of that
year and throw in a few wild cards as well. They pay a lot of money.

The name of the ATP year end event kept changing constantly, but it was basically
strictly as per the ATP rankings and the the top 8 were invited to play. If someone were
not available (say for example due to playing in GS cup), they went down the list
as needed, but no wild card business.

Since they were cutting into each others market, they finally came to senses
and combine their events into one single event. At that time, the rules were formed
as described in the second para. Also, only one GS winner is allowed to use the]
inside route, even if multiple are eligible. The highest ranked GS winner who did
not finish in top 8, gets the inside track slot.

I don't see anything wrong with the system.

I thought it ridiculous to have 2 YE tourneys! I didn't pay too much attention to the GS Cup; I think the draw may have been 12 players! I know they manipulated the format and formula many times going back to Lendl v Connors when it was blatantly obvious Ivan lost RR match to Jimmy so he wouldn't have to play BORG until the final! Borg had defaulted a match due to the FLU, IIRC, giving him a 2-1 record! If Lendl had beaten Connors, he would have been 3-0 and no one wanted to play Borg in those final years! I still remember Connors shaking his fist at Lendl for meandering into the net and losing points! He wasn't happy, but he couldn't do the same thing! Totally classless, but Lendl was from Czechoslovakia!

What did I just read?

It was one of many reasons they've used to change the YE tourneys format! DUH! :s uzzled :nono :angel:

 

[Front242]

No idea why he's even questioning the ATP rule in any case or why it mentions Cilic who is currently in 6th place in the race and will likely easily qualify anyway. Andy's only at number 10 in the race right now so he should be more concerned with trying to one up Ferrer and Raonic. He's miles behind Berdych too right now.

 

[Federberg]

It just shows his state of mind. A severe lack of confidence in his ability to comfortably qualify. He shouldn't be worried about getting ranked 8th. He should be targeting 5th or 6th. Truly pathetic...

 

[DarthFed]

He should worry about finishing in the top 8 instead of whining about a reasonable rule IMO. Truth is the majors are the holy grail, so much so that putting a point value on them doesn't necessarily tell the whole story (after all 2 MS events = 1 major in points). Even if Cilic and Stan had done absolutely nothing else this year and failed to make top 8 there is a reasonable argument that they should be in the YEC. Murray could go undefeated the rest of the year and not drop a set and...he would take Stan or Cilic's year in a heartbeat (so would Roger even though he will be #2 at year end most likely).

 

[Front242]

Yup, win and a slam and who cares if you lose in the first round the rest of the year, it's still been a year where you won a slam which is what everyone would wish for. The top guys obviously want more consistency throughout the year but my point is that guys who previously won nothing big like Cilic are truly happy with their year and should be even if they did nothing else.

 

[brokenshoelace]

My problem with these sort of complaints is why wasn't Murray making the same point when he was qualifying every year? It's not that he doesn't have a case (I mean the idea is that the top 8 players in the ATP race qualify, so he's not completely out of line with his reasoning), but that the timing makes it less likely for the arguments to revolve around the point he's raising, which comes off as self-serving.

 

[DarthFed]

Yeah, I have a hard time picturing him making these comments if he was in a situation where he won a slam yet was still in danger of finishing outside the top 8. Also he probably didn't think about it for a second the past 6 years when he was routinely finishing top 5 and had qualified for YEC by the end of the USO.

 

[Front242]

So true. It's only now a problem because of his poor play. You reap what you sow. Play well and you qualify no problem.

 

[Front242]

He has to at least make the top 8 before even being within sniffing chance of even having a reason to air a complaint in any case. He's currently number 10 in the race so he hasn't a leg to stand on.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The complaint is of course intended to be self-serving.

But, the funny thing is that for all we know Cilic might qualify directly as well, even
though he has inside route.

Also, even if Cilic does not qualify directly and gets the inside route, it is possible
that Murray may not be the affected party as he needs to be in Top 8 first of all to
be the affected party. He is currently at position 10.

IMO, Murray should have at least waited until he gets into top 8 before complaining.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Just so that people understand the rule..........

In case neither Stan nor Cilic ends up in top 8 (this is not possible as
already Stan has enough points, but for argument sake I am supposing this),
and both finish in top 20, BOTH WILL NOT get an automatic entry into WTF.
Only the higher ranked one of the two will get automatic entry.

I think reserving one slot for a GS winner is quite reasonable to make
the WTF event exciting.

Finally, even though this rule is there, it actually gets invoked very
rarely. So far, only once has this rule been really used.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here is the Grand Slam Cup wiki page. The two competing year end events got merged starting from the new
millennia. i.e, year 2000.

I think it is a good thing that they merged it. Two tennis organizations competing with
each other and cutting into each other's market and splitting the field was a bad idea.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

No idea why he's even questioning the ATP rule in any case or why it mentions Cilic who is currently in 6th place in the race and will likely easily qualify anyway. Andy's only at number 10 in the race right now so he should be more concerned with trying to one up Ferrer and Raonic. He's miles behind Berdych too right now.

Cilic is mentioned as he is likely to be the beneficiary of this rule, if some one is.
But, I agree with you and think Cilic will directly qualify as well.

 

[Iona16]

I can't seem to find the context of these quotes and context is very important. I'd like to see exactly what question Andy was asked.

I have to say it is rather an odd rule. It is the ATP World Tour Finals and the slams are not run by the ATP. The selling point is to see the best 8 players in the world. The fact that you could win a slam (obviously an incredible achievement) but be #20 in the world and qualify is rather odd. That is obviously unlikely but it could happen.

I know doubles players have benefited from this rule but has a singles player? I can't think of any.

I don't see anything wrong with what Andy said. However, the rules are what they are. I honestly can't see Andy making the WTF. He can blame himself if he doesn't and I'll be blaming him as well.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Anyone remembers a player who benefited from this rule?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Anyone remembers a player who benefited from this rule?

The system is in place since 2000, i.e, for the last 14 years. I think 2 or 3 benefitted from
the rule so far. I am sure of one.

Goran in 2001 and may be Coasta and may be Gaudio. most probably no one else.

I don't think the rule would need to be invoked this year. Stan has already qualified
by virtue of points. Cilic is a strong contender and likely to make it directly as well
as he tends to perform well on indoor courts.