Barclays ATP World Tour Finals = Meh

by **Coolhand Texas** » Sat, 27 Nov 2010 22:44

I like the round robin, but cro the 16 player draw doesnt sound too bad either

by **AUSSIE_FABS** » Sun, 28 Nov 2010 02:45

But point of top 8 is so it is supposed to be always competitive big match also money won't help motivation of players I suppose it would help generate pr and people may think it more elite.They could make it worth as much as grandslam points wise, although that would mean 3 hardcourt grand slams.

They could make finals on grass that would be interesting. Ot could alternate surface each year, clay-->hardcourt ---> grass and repeat. I don't know just throwing things out there.

I'm fine with the system now it doesn't bother me non tennis fans don't care about it at all, it saves me from having to bite my tongue when friends act like they know it. I don't get involved in nfl talks and talk shit like I know what I'm talking about lol.

by **Sherlock 117** » Sun, 28 Nov 2010 05:15

Personally I feel more excited for this tournament than any other tournament besides the grand slams (just wish I could watch the matches). I always like it when the top players play each other, and this format has 15 matches between top 10 players all in 1 week. You just don't get that anywhere else.

I would be completely against a 16 person tournament, I think it waters down the depth far too much. You get a few people withdrawing and suddenly somebody outside of the top 20 can get in.

However, one alternative that may be exciting, albeit it short, would be an 8 person knockout tournament with matches being best of 5 sets. This could be acceptable since you have a maximum of three matches in the tournament. Quarterfinals could be played Monday through Wednesday, semifinals on Thursday and Friday, doubles championship on Saturday and singles championship on Sunday. I doubt this would ever happen, but the final could even be best of 7 sets lol. Setwise this format would have finalists playing between 9-15 sets instead of 10-15, so it is basically the same.

by **Cro Morgan** » Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:45

While I still think this tournament is flawed, as a hardcore tennis fan, I'm very much looking forward to the Nadal/Federer final.

Here in the States, I'm definitely in the minority. Matter of fact, ESPN2 is providing the only mainstream coverage of the tournament. How much coverage? They televised only one of the semifinals (just one!?!) - and that was tape delayed. :evil:

ESPN2 is broadcasting the final live. Thank you for that. :roll:

by **Coolhand Texas** » Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:26

but tennis channel provided live coverage for the rest of the tournament?

by **Cro Morgan** » Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:31

Coolhand Texas wrote:but tennis channel provided live coverage for the rest of the tournament?

The Tennis Channel isn't exactly mainstream. I'm a Comcast subscriber and I don't get it - not without paying extra. :evil:

by **Yippie-Caiay** » Thu, 02 Dec 2010 02:41

Cro Morgan wrote:
Moralspain wrote:do you have any suggestion to make it more interesting? .

• 16 man draw -- the top 16 ranked players in the world.
• $2,000,000 purse; prize money distributed as follows:

Lose first round: $0.00
Lose quarterfinal: $0.00
Lose semifinal: $0.00
Lose final: $0.00
Winner: $2,000,000

Now that's a tournament I'd watch.

lol that's spot on..i mean it..this is excellent!

but it will never happen

by **coke4** » Thu, 02 Dec 2010 14:04

Cro Morgan wrote:While I still think this tournament is flawed, as a hardcore tennis fan, I'm very much looking forward to the Nadal/Federer final.

Here in the States, I'm definitely in the minority. Matter of fact, ESPN2 is providing the only mainstream coverage of the tournament. How much coverage? They televised only one of the semifinals (just one!?!) - and that was tape delayed.

ESPN2 is broadcasting the final live. Thank you for that.

In Ireland I get bits of Aussie Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and Queens, then a bit of US Open and now thankfully a bit of this WTF's.

by **Q. Reese** » Thu, 02 Dec 2010 16:16

Cro Morgan wrote:
Coolhand Texas wrote:but tennis channel provided live coverage for the rest of the tournament?

The Tennis Channel isn't exactly mainstream. I'm a Comcast subscriber and I don't get it - not without paying extra.

We should do a Tennis Channel movement. You will be the director of that movement Cro!

What do you say?! :lol:

by **jayl0ve** » Thu, 02 Dec 2010 23:42

I say...WTF are you even talking about??!

by **Q. Reese** » Sat, 04 Dec 2010 09:46

The Tennis Channel should be as readily available as ESPN and ESPN 2. Hence, I proposed a Tennis Channel Movement with Cro being the head of it. :lol:

It was more of a joke really; yet, still agreeing with his viewpoint.

It's something I was disappointed with when we had cable at home. The cable company wanted us to pay extra just for that channel. That is when I found free online streaming online (Star TV Network was what I watched at the time).

by **GOA MASTER MDMA** » Sat, 04 Dec 2010 09:50

again ,RIDDLER Q.Reese ,WTF you are talking about ?????
creating a online channel with tennis ??
,i have no idear whats going on in your brain :cry:

by **VillaJ100** » Sat, 04 Dec 2010 12:36

in the UK, on non-subscription tv we get selected oz open matches, i.e murray, fed and nadal usually, until the semis when all are shown. then the french open final, then full coverage of queens and wimbledon, then the final of the us open, and full coverage of the WTF, although i think this is just because its in london. also the bbc show most of britains davis cup matches.

on sky sports, (subscription, think around £40 a month), you get full coverage of every masters series and selected 500/250 tournaments, coverage at the french open, and full coverage at the US open. eurosport cover the WTA (snore) and some selected matches at all the grand slams.

by **Mike Rotchtickles** » Sat, 04 Dec 2010 12:53

VillaJ100 wrote:in the UK, on non-subscription tv we get selected oz open matches, i.e murray, fed and nadal usually, until the semis when all are shown. then the french open final, then full coverage of queens and wimbledon, then the final of the us open, and full coverage of the WTF, although i think this is just because its in london. also the bbc show most of britains davis cup matches.

on sky sports, (subscription, think around £40 a month), you get full coverage of every masters series and selected 500/250 tournaments, coverage at the french open, and full coverage at the US open. eurosport cover the WTA (snore) and some selected matches at all the grand slams.

similar to what we have here.

on the free to air channels like SABC and E-TV, we get shown a few tournaments and especially more coverage if there's a local tennis player involved in the tourney.

on the pay channel - DSTV, we get almost everything.
Quite extensive coverage of all the major tournaments. Sadly, that's also including the WTA. :lol:

on a side note,
and the main reason for many football fans here in South Africa that pay for the DSTV bouquet of channels is that they show every Premiership game. And I mean every single one of them during the season. As well as the majority of games in La Liga, Bundesliga and Serie A, and all the Champions League matches.

Barclays ATP World Tour Finals = Meh

Who is online