Week 39 - ATP World Tour 250 - Kuala Lumpur

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Week 39 - ATP World Tour 250 - Kuala Lumpur

Spectator · All-time great

Shhh wrote:
I am sure the main reason is for match practise but, should a player make the 1st round, the prize money is over $8,700, thats more than an individual receives for making the semis in doubles.

The prize money system is really quite flawed that way (said with an awareness that I am biased towards doubles). For example, Inglot (#47 doubles) has 2012 earnings of $95,599; Berlocq (#47 singles) has earned $386,495 from singles play alone. Yes, there are differences in numbers of tournaments played, and some inequality is to be anticipated given the different nature of singles/doubles. But 1:4 seems excessive.

Wonder whether the Big Four will take that up with the ATP/Slams as well.

-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 02:42:46 PM

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Q1 : Dominic Inglot UNR beat Ahmed Deedat Abdul Razak (MAS) UNR : 6-1 6-4

Q2 : Dominic Inglot UNR v (Q7) Nick Lindahl (AUS) WR 528 (CH 187 - May 2010)

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Dom has taken the first set 6-3 against Lindahl and it is currently *1-2 on serve in the second

SMC1809 · All-time great

If he wins he'll play Austin Karosi in the FQR who is there thanks to a bye and a walkover. He's ranked 1352.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Dom breaks for *5-4 in the second set and will serve for the match.

SMC1809 · All-time great

Big Bad Dom back with a ranking.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Q2 : Dominic Inglot UNR beats (Q7) Nick Lindahl (AUS) WR 528 : 6-3 6-4

FQR : Q2 : Dominic Inglot UNR v Austin Karosi (USA) WR 1352

freerider · Futures level

Bob in Spain wrote:
In the qualifying draw here, there is a guy called Austin Karosi (USA) WR 1352 (CH 1235 - 2012) who has just picked gained 6 ranking points without hitting a ball. Had a Bye in Q1 and a w/o against Top Seed Vasek Pospisil WR 120 in Q2.

Talk about luck of the draw.

Theres still hope for Robert Dee

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

And just as a point of interest, his doubles partner TC Huey has also made it through 2 rounds to reach the FQR.

Doubles players on the march !!

indiana · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
Shhh wrote:
I am sure the main reason is for match practise but, should a player make the 1st round, the prize money is over $8,700, thats more than an individual receives for making the semis in doubles.
The prize money system is really quite flawed that way (said with an awareness that I am biased towards doubles). For example, Inglot (#47 doubles) has 2012 earnings of $95,599; Berlocq (#47 singles) has earned $386,495 from singles play alone. Yes, there are differences in numbers of tournaments played, and some inequality is to be anticipated given the different nature of singles/doubles. But 1:4 seems excessive.
Wonder whether the Big Four will take that up with the ATP/Slams as well.

-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 02:42:46 PM

It's clearly a matter of opinion, but my opinion would be that the above comparison looks perfectly reasonable to me. I can live with about 4 : 1 at that sort of level, to me it's only the very top doubles players that should be anywhere near a top 50 singles player.

Singles to me will always be the ultimate professional tennis game, and I'm sorry if some folk think it unfair.

Doesn't seem to stop many guys specialising in doubles including a notable number of Brits.

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 03:47:41 PM

freerider · Futures level

does anybody know if Inglot going to make a go of a singles career again, or is he just in singles for the match practise/money?

RJA · Hall of fame

freerider wrote:
does anybody know if Inglot going to make a go of a singles career again, or is he just in singles for the match practise/money?

I would guess he was just there for the doubles and when a place in the qualifyying draw became avaialable he took his chance. If he was planning to try a make a go of singles he would probably start playing some smaller events first.

indiana · Tennis legend

The top 10 in the current doubles rankings also are the top 10 earners in doubles this year with doubles earnings as follows :

1. B Bryan $ 780,469

1. M Bryan $ 780,469

3. L Paes $ 557,972

4. N Mirnyi $ 557,897

4. D Nestor $ 557,897

6. R Stepanek $ 528,586

7. R Lindstedt $ 460,327

7. H Tecau $ 460,327

9, M Lopez $ 458,982

10,M Frystenberg $ 345,703

http://www.stevegtennis.com/rankings/2012/$$091712.htm

So, the top 9 doubles players' doubles earnings are above the WR 47 singles player's singles earnings. It seems 10th ranked doubles roughly equivalent to 50th ranked singles in earnings. That just about works for me and I wouldn't want it weighted any more to doubles. I reckon that they get a pretty decent deal comparatively.

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 04:23:30 PM

Spectator · All-time great

Well, I would favour a slightly better ratio, personally. But beyond that, I think that the primary issue is one of the absolute amount for players below the top 50. I'm quite comfortable with the absolute earnings of the top doubles' teams -- the sums are high and they have much greater longevity than singles' players (though if Federer keeps up ....) But given that the expenses of travel are as high for the doubles players as for the singles players (and that even doubles players must have some coaching and other expenses!), I don't think that the rewards for the doubles players below the 50 mark are sufficient. Certainly if you were someone who was trying to break through from about 80+ and you came from a country that had few Challengers/ATP tournaments and couldn't offer you funding, you'd struggle, I suspect. Happy to be proven wrong on that, though.

-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 06:01:02 PM

-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 22nd of September 2012 06:02:25 PM