An annual event at the Indian Wells tournament is ?Breakfast with Charlie?, an informal get-together between the media and the tournament director Charlie Pasarell. This year Pasarell was accompanied by Raymond Moore, the President of PM Sports, which has taken over some of the management functions at the tournament.
Two of the dominant topics of conversation were player no-shows on the women?s side, and the status of the doubles discipline. And there was a whole lot of figurative face-slapping going on!
Shed a Tear for Tier I
The Tier I tournaments are in principle the most important events on the tour after the four ?majors?. These are the competitions that offer the biggest prize money and the most ranking points. In fact, the WTA boosted the points available at the Tier Is this year in an attempt to raise their prestige.
However, with the exception of Miami (regarded in many quarters as the ?fifth Grand Slam?), the top female players often shun these tournaments. A case in point was Tokyo, the first Tier I of the season, where only three of the top ten players entered. And most recently, Indian Wells had to do without five of the top ten players, with only one of the no-shows (Davenport) missing because of injury.
Quite understandably, the Tier I tournament managers, who put up big prize money only to find themselves with watered-down fields, are not thrilled with this state of affairs. Raymond Moore was unequivocal when he commented on the issue at Indian Wells. "We put up the second highest prize money on the ladies' tour. To have the top players playing in Dubai for $580,000 total prize money, or $580,000 prize money in Scottsdale down the road is, frankly, a slap in the face for us?. I really think the women'
s tour - that's the WTA, the organization - needs to look at this very seriously."
Given the choice, the top players will often opt for ?lesser? tournaments for a variety of reasons (hefty appearance fees, more relaxed or comfortable atmosphere, geographical location, desire for a lighter schedule, greater likelihood of winning a title, etc.). If the WTA wants to do something about the no-shows, it will at least partially have to take away the player?s choice. This is what the ATP has attempted to do for the elite men?s Masters Series events. All players whose ranking makes them eli
gible are automatically entered in these events. If they withdraw they have to supply a valid injury reason or else face a fine, and they receive zero points, counting toward their ranking.
The ATP?s policy has not been a total success. Tennis players are masters in the art of fabricating injuries, and when in doubt the ever-popular ?fatigue? excuse can always be invoked. Still, it?s better than what the WTA has been able to accomplish, and the Indian Wells brain trust feels that the ATP?s Masters Series policy should be replicated for the women?s Tier I events. Raymond Moore: ?They?ve made this a ?must play?. It?s a required stop, as are the other eight Masters Series events. I simply
think the women need to do the same.?
Look for the WTA to deal with this problem in the very near future. ?This will be an issue on their agenda very quickly,? predicts Moore.
Whither doubles? (continued)
Having had his face slapped by the top women, Charlie Pasarell then turned around and gave the doubles players a figurative whack in the mush. ?Certainly I think the amount of money that has been paid to the doubles players, it doesn?t warrant what they sell you in tickets,? commented Pasarell. ?It doesn?t mean that much anymore. We have to do something about it.? Among the suggestions advanced in some quarters was the elimination of men?s and women?s doubles at Indian Wells, or replacing them with a
mixed doubles event.
When we asked this year?s Indian Wells doubles champion Mark Knowles to comment on Pasarell?s reflections, he did not hold back. ?It?s pretty disturbing, it?s a slap in the face,? said the Bahamian. ?There was a huge crowd there for our final, and they were really into the match. It seems there are a lot of fans that are into the doubles.? Indeed, we noticed that crowds for the early round doubles matches were not any worse than crowds for the lower-profile singles matches on the outside courts, and q
uite a few fans stayed around for both the men?s and women?s doubles finals.
Knowles agreed with one of the ATP?s experiments to spice up the doubles game, namely, giving special exemption into the doubles draw for popular singles players regardless of their doubles ranking. ?With the rules they are implementing now, there are sufficient singles players playing doubles.? But both Knowles and his partner Daniel Nestor disagreed with an experiment that the tour is testing in selected tournaments, which replaces the third set of doubles matches with a ?super tie-break?. ?In San Jo
se,? said Nestor, the fans actually booed when they announced the super tie-break.? Nestor says that a final decision on whether to implement the super tie-break on a permanent basis will be made at Wimbledon this summer.
We have a lot of sympathy with the valiant doubles specialists who feel that the integrity of their discipline should be maintained. Clearly, however, they seem to be more and more isolated in this opinion.