A list

[*skriptis]

Order of prestige

Wimbledon
US open
French open
Australian open
Singles gold
Davis cup
YEC
Italian open
Monaco
Canada
Cincunatti
Indian wells
Miami
Shanghai
Paris
Madrid





--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Whisper]

On 28/11/2017 12:23 AM, *skriptis wrote:
> Order of prestige
>
> Wimbledon
> US open
> French open
> Australian open
> Singles gold
> Davis cup
> YEC
> Italian open
> Monaco
> Canada
> Cincunatti
> Indian wells
> Miami
> Shanghai
> Paris
> Madrid
>

I'd throw in yr-end no.1 after singles gold.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[John Liang]

Order of prestige

Wimbledon
USO
AO, FO
Olympic
YEC
YE NO.1

Rest who cares.

Davis Cup is a team competition.

[The Iceberg]

Is this the old pre-2000 YEC instead of the big fun O2 exo?

[jdeluise]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 00:20:06 +1100, Whisper wrote:


>>
> I'd throw in yr-end no.1 after singles gold.

er, YE #1 isn't a tournament and isn't a great achievement given it
typically includes lots of losses.

[*skriptis]

jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

You can lose lots of matches in DC or YEC and still win it.

Year end number 1 is not a tournament but it's an achievement
which I forgot, so your criticism and attempts to oppose whisper
in every opportunity and at any cost, are actually quite sad.

[jdeluise]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:59:19 +0100, *skriptis wrote:

> Year end number 1 is not a tournament but it's an achievement
> which I forgot, so your criticism and attempts to oppose whisper in
> every opportunity and at any cost, are actually quite sad.

Not really, it's one of the key reasons for which Whisper belittles YEC
(because you can win it while losing one or two matches). In fact, you
yourself have used the same argument.

Whatever the case, YE#1 is an oddball in that list and doesn't belong.

[jdeluise]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:59:19 +0100, *skriptis wrote:


>

> You can lose lots of matches in DC or YEC and still win it.
>

DC is a team competition, "you" don't win it... big difference.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
> Italian open
> Monaco
> Canada
> Cincunatti
> Indian wells
> Miami
> Shanghai
> Paris
> Madrid

Why is Rome first?
Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it? Shouldn't Sampras winning
it actually decrease its value as clay court tournament...

Monaco has much greater history.

And IW/Miami are longer/bigger (although played on a parking lot and
thus have little historic value).

-

As for slams, RG is the most important.
...Wimbledon is on obscure surface.
...The other two are played on a parking lot.

Olympics is 16 times more important than any slam.

YEC has less value than DC.

[soccerfan777]

Troll much?

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

> *skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
>> Italian open
>> Monaco
>> Canada
>> Cincunatti
>> Indian wells
>> Miami
>> Shanghai
>> Paris
>> Madrid
>
> Why is Rome first?
> Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it? Shouldn't Sampras winning
> it actually decrease its value as clay court tournament...
>
> Monaco has much greater history.

You mean longer? That yes, but is it greater history?
Cincinnati has a longer history than AO, so what.

Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships, it's
an iconic and historic city in European history. It has fantastic
facilities and Foro Italico built in fascist style on Mussolini
orders is a fantastic venue.

Have you been there?
It puts FO venue to shame.


"It was built between 1928 and 1938 as the Foro Mussolini
(literally Mussolini's
Forum) under the design of Enrico Del Debbio and, later, Luigi
Moretti . Inspired by the Roman forums of the imperial age, its
design is lauded as a preeminent example of Italian Fascist
architecture instituted by Mussolini."

> And IW/Miami are longer/bigger (although played on a parking lot and
> thus have little historic value).

You said it yourself.

> As for slams, RG is the most important.
> ...Wimbledon is on obscure surface.
> ...The other two are played on a parking lot.

> Olympics is 16 times more important than any slam.

> YEC has less value than DC.

I am not into trolling fights with you.

Is Giro d'Italia greater than Tour de France? No. So neither is
all of this what you're saying true.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships

And Madrid is capital of Spain...

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
>> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships
>
> And Madrid is capital of Spain...

But the tournament is not Spanish open, it's Madrid open. That's
lame. And besides Rome > Madrid.

Even if it were Spanish open, starting from today, it has no
tradition, and most importantly they have shitty conditions for a
clay tournament.

They should have stayed indoors. Would have beaten and I believe
would have taken over the honour from Paris-Bercy as Europe's top
indoor tournament.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:13:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
>>> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships
>>
>> And Madrid is capital of Spain...
>
>
>
> But the tournament is not Spanish open, it's Madrid open.

Actually Barcelona is national championship. Equal to Rome...

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:13:
>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
>>>> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships
>>>
>>> And Madrid is capital of Spain...
>>
>>
>>
>> But the tournament is not Spanish open, it's Madrid open.
>
> Actually Barcelona is national championship. Equal to Rome...

It's Barcelona Open
so no chance.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:20:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:13:
>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
>>>>> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships
>>>>
>>>> And Madrid is capital of Spain...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But the tournament is not Spanish open, it's Madrid open.
>>
>> Actually Barcelona is national championship. Equal to Rome...
>
>
> It's Barcelona Open
> so no chance.
>
>

I am telling you it IS national Spanish championship. The name is
irrelevant to that.

[*skriptis]

You're a such a funny guy.

Nadal owns records at three most prestigious clay events (FO, IO,
MC) and you want to boost 6th most prestigious tournament on clay
(Barcelona) to #2 simply because he has better numbers
there?


Paris
Rome
Monte Carlo
Hamburg/Madrid
Barcelona

[Gracchus]

I have been to Madrid and Barcelona. Barcelona is nicer.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:31:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:20:
>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 23:13:
>>>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>>>>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 28.11.2017 klo 22:53:
>>>>>>> Rome is a capital of Italy, so it's a national championships
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And Madrid is capital of Spain...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But the tournament is not Spanish open, it's Madrid open.
>>>>
>>>> Actually Barcelona is national championship. Equal to Rome...
>>>
>>>
>>> It's Barcelona Open
>>> so no chance.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I am telling you it IS national Spanish championship. The name is
>> irrelevant to that.
>
>
> You're a such a funny guy.
>
> Nadal owns records at three most prestigious clay events (FO, IO,
> MC) and you want to boost 6th most prestigious tournament on clay
> (Barcelona) to #2 simply because he has better numbers
> there?
>

I'm not trying to boost Barcelona, just stating the fact that it's the
Spanish national championship. Best Spanish player even receives a
separate trophy. This of course doesn't bode well for your "Italian
championship" argument.

[TT]

Solved.

[Whisper]

On 29/11/2017 7:04 AM, TT wrote:
> *skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
>> Italian open
>> Monaco
>> Canada
>> Cincunatti
>> Indian wells
>> Miami
>> Shanghai
>> Paris
>> Madrid
>
> Why is Rome first?
> Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it? Shouldn't Sampras winning
> it actually decrease its value as clay court tournament...
>
>

It has nothing to do with Sampras. If you read a bit of tennis history
you'd know Italian Open is the no.2 clay title, precursor to FO.

[TT]

Whisper kirjoitti 29.11.2017 klo 8:14:
> On 29/11/2017 7:04 AM, TT wrote:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
>>> Italian open
>>> Monaco
>>> Canada
>>> Cincunatti
>>> Indian wells
>>> Miami
>>> Shanghai
>>> Paris
>>> Madrid
>>
>> Why is Rome first?
>> Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it? Shouldn't Sampras winning
>> it actually decrease its value as clay court tournament...
>>
>>
>
> It has nothing to do with Sampras.  If you read a bit of tennis history
> you'd know Italian Open is the no.2 clay title, precursor to FO.
>
>

Monte Carlo is more of a precursor in historical context.

[John Liang]

You are wrong. TT is correct. In term of history Monte Carlo Open is the 2nd oldest clay court tournament just behind FO. It is No.2 clay court title for years even way before Italian Open. Italian Open is NO.3 follow by Madrid/Hamburg.

[RaspingDrive]

Both you and Whisper should cease this 'precursor' BS, because they are only so in a nominal sense, that is, chronologically. They are tune ups for the big one. If not, you will have to confront the fact that Cinci is a precursor to USO, mind you.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 29/11/2017 14.37, RaspingDrive wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 3:12:21 AM UTC-5, TT wrote:
>> Whisper kirjoitti 29.11.2017 klo 8:14:
>>> On 29/11/2017 7:04 AM, TT wrote:
>>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
>>>>> Italian open Monaco Canada Cincunatti Indian wells Miami
>>>>> Shanghai Paris Madrid
>>>>
>>>> Why is Rome first? Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it?
>>>> Shouldn't Sampras winning it actually decrease its value as
>>>> clay court tournament...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> It has nothing to do with Sampras. If you read a bit of tennis
>>> history you'd know Italian Open is the no.2 clay title, precursor
>>> to FO.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Monte Carlo is more of a precursor in historical context.
>
> Both you and Whisper should cease this 'precursor' BS, because they
> are only so in a nominal sense, that is, chronologically.

Their importance stems from the European amateur tour. The rocks of
which were the national championships: France, Italy, Germany being the
big tennis nations.

> They are
> tune ups for the big one.

That's he ultramontane slammist view with a short history behind it.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 29/11/2017 14.47, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> On 29/11/2017 14.37, RaspingDrive wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 3:12:21 AM UTC-5, TT wrote:
>>> Whisper kirjoitti 29.11.2017 klo 8:14:
>>>> On 29/11/2017 7:04 AM, TT wrote:
>>>>> *skriptis kirjoitti 27.11.2017 klo 15:23:
>>>>>> Italian open Monaco Canada Cincunatti Indian wells Miami Shanghai
>>>>>> Paris Madrid
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is Rome first? Because Sampras won it and Whisper likes it?
>>>>> Shouldn't Sampras winning it actually decrease its value as
>>>>> clay court tournament...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It has nothing to do with Sampras.  If you read a bit of tennis
>>>> history you'd know Italian Open is the no.2 clay title, precursor
>>>> to FO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Monte Carlo is more of a precursor in historical context.
>>
>> Both you and Whisper should cease this 'precursor' BS, because they
>> are only so in a nominal sense, that is, chronologically.
>

> Their importance stems from the Continental European amateur tour.

Fixed.

[TT]

Cinci was more of a regional tournament: won first time by non-US player
in 1941. Monaco was won first time by non-frenchie in 1897, Doherty.

Monaco can also be said to be precursor for RG since it actually
predated the French Open which became international in 1925. MC was
arguably the most important international clay tournament for years
before French became open...

Well... actually WHCC was the immediate precursor, as was Paris Olympics
in 1924.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Hard_Court_Championships

[TT]

Well if we exclude Pancho Segura who had US citizenship... then Cincy
was won first time by international player in 1960!

Compare to MC and 1897... international from the very beginning!

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

Ok, Monte Carlo was big from the beginning, but so was Irish Open.

IO is still bigger.

[RaspingDrive]

The alternate view has its protagonists bickering over which tune up should be a 'precursor' to the big one.

[RaspingDrive]

As in it being more prestigious?

[RaspingDrive]

Not that it is anything significant or something but to me IO sounds more prestigious.

[Whisper]

Cinci is in USA & we already have USO. Italy is a separate country.

[Whisper]

Exactly.

Monte Carlo? Give me a fucking break.

[Whisper]

Much bigger. There is no comparison. MC is a tune-up.



--
"A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"

[Whisper]

On 30/11/2017 2:27 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 9:20:20 AM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>>>
>>
>>

>> Ok, Monte Carlo was big from the beginning, but so was Irish Open.
>>
>> IO is still bigger.
>> --
>
> As in it being more prestigious?
>

Of course.

[Whisper]

Yes, but it also is far more prestigious. I'd much rather have 1 IO
over 10 MC.

[TT]

Yeah sure, fuck off Whisper... :)

So you just decided to make a 10 posts which all say that Rome > Monaco
because you feel that way...

[Whisper]

I always considered IO the 2nd biggest clay title. In the 80's only
Italian & FO were televised in Australia - nobody cared at all about the
clay events - minor tune-ups.

[Whisper]

about the 'other' clay events.....

[TT]

Sort of like Wimbledon is not shown in Europe nowadays then.

[TT]

So is China.

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

And I do have non china open (shanghai) > madrid and bercy

[TT]

You have it below 3 US masters. So there goes the 'separate country'
excuse as well. But keep on trying, maybe you can come up with some
reasoning eventually apart from "I feel that".

[Pelle Svanslös]

I don't think propping up MC because Rafito won it 10 times is the
alternate view. It's the fanboi view.

[The Iceberg]

The O2 exo is a big fun tournament, quite different to the old YEC. If the O2 hadn't specifically asked Fed to spec the surface that might be different, but that what they did.

The only reason you're trying to disparage year end #1 is cos of Sampras and you being a Fedfan.

[*skriptis]

But Shanghai isn't China Open.
And it has no tradition compared to tennis traditions in Florida,
west coast etc.

I expect it to grow in the future, but so far it ain't there yet.

[TT]

Actually I've been countering the fanboi view... it's obvious that "Rome
is most important" view comes from Sampras winning it and then Whisper
brainwashing RST for years because of that.

As for Rafa's 10 wins... at least we can say that his MC achievement
matches nicely his RG achievement which is probably NOT a coincidence.
MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay tournament.

[TT]

Oh, we get back to 'name argument' now...

I already won the argument with Barcelona. And the capital argument as well.

> And it has no tradition compared to tennis traditions in Florida,
> west coast etc.
>

Well Rome has no tennis tradition compared to Monaco...

> I expect it to grow in the future, but so far it ain't there yet.
>

The problem is that it's so far away and end of the season when
everybody is tired.

[RaspingDrive]

Make it *an* alternate view, then. fanboi or otherwise, it is also a view.

[TT]

So which is one is more important, MC or Rome?

It's probably a fools errand to try differentiate them, they are roughly
as important.

Although I personally would lean on MC because it correlates better with
RG results and has longer history.

A strong argument for MC is also Rome's current position in calendar
straight after Madrid... Madrid finalists are tired when Rome comes and
in fact I think Rafa half-tanked Rome this year - rather losing to Thiem
in semis than risking RG form, and it worked well for him (not so much
for Thiem who was slaughtered at RG by Rafa)

Vice versa one could argue that at MC many players have not yet found
their clay feet, apart from hardcore clay specialists who already played
some clay before it. And Nadal etc, natural talent clay courters.

So yeah, it seems to me that MC > Rome. Not by much but definitely so
especially with current schedule.

[RaspingDrive]

Not quite. IO appears just before the FO, when slam watchers (read: the whole world) are computing their favorites chances for the FO. MC, on the other hand, is held way earlier, and is a precursor no doubt, but for other tune-ups leading to FO ;)

> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay tournament.

That is one opinion.

[RaspingDrive]

All of them are tune-ups before the biggie. Rome probably is more prestigious than MC, but I can be coaxed to believe the opposite being true. MC, Rome, it doesn't matter. The FO is the real thing.

[TT]

Where does this leave IW, Miami, Paris & Shanghai...

>> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay tournament.
>
> That is one opinion.
>

Actually that is not an opinion but a fact. Hops made a study about it.
Also more recent results confirm this (10=10 etc).

I'm pretty certain that MC is the 'tuneup' that correlates best of all
tuneups with its respective slam. I made a study on clay season & NA HC
season and that was the result to my recollection, although I haven't
updated the stats in a while.

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

Rubbish and irrelevant.

Of course they probably correlate when you have Nadal winning 10
of them each. Remove him?

But even if the correlate or not, does it matter?

[RaspingDrive]

On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 8:38:01 AM UTC-5, TT wrote:

> So which is one is more important, MC or Rome?
>
> It's probably a fools errand to try differentiate them, they are roughly
> as important.

As a prognosticator for the FO, it is probably Rome.

> Although I personally would lean on MC because it correlates better with
> RG results and has longer history.

It does? Other than for Rafa? More evidence please.

> A strong argument for MC is also Rome's current position in calendar
> straight after Madrid... Madrid finalists are tired when Rome comes and
> in fact I think Rafa half-tanked Rome this year - rather losing to Thiem
> in semis than risking RG form, and it worked well for him (not so much
> for Thiem who was slaughtered at RG by Rafa)

Madrid is the odd ball here. Maybe they could convert it to blue clay and have it after FO.

[RaspingDrive]

Practically useless in the grand scheme of things. Maybe Miami because it may have some history?

> >> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay tournament.
> >
> > That is one opinion.
> >
>
> Actually that is not an opinion but a fact. Hops made a study about it.
> Also more recent results confirm this (10=10 etc).

OK.

> I'm pretty certain that MC is the 'tuneup' that correlates best of all
> tuneups with its respective slam. I made a study on clay season & NA HC
> season and that was the result to my recollection, although I haven't
> updated the stats in a while.

OK. I believe you.

[Pelle Svanslös]

In Rafa's case I would guess not.

> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay tournament.

And this correlation makes MC prestigious? Where does this correlation
come from? From Rafa! Lol

[TT]

Hops made a study on it...
http://www.tennis28.com/studies/CW5.html

> But even if the correlate or not, does it matter?
>
>

That is the question. I think so.

Madrid is generally seen as the most inferior clay masters, and part of
it is because of the (relatively) poor correlation with RG results. Same
with Hamburg before it I think.

[TT]

RaspingDrive kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 15:54:
> On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 8:38:01 AM UTC-5, TT wrote:
>
>> So which is one is more important, MC or Rome?
>>
>> It's probably a fools errand to try differentiate them, they are roughly
>> as important.
>
> As a prognosticator for the FO, it is probably Rome.
>
>> Although I personally would lean on MC because it correlates better with
>> RG results and has longer history.
>
> It does? Other than for Rafa? More evidence please.
>

http://www.tennis28.com/studies/CW5.html

[TT]

Thank you for not making me update my stats. :)

[*skriptis]

I definitely rank national championships, Italy, Canada, and
Monaco above other MS series. No doubts. It's a matter of
principle and not a "feel".

You can disagree but you can't accuse me of having hidden intentions.


Of all the other non-national championships, Cincunatti is the
oldest and most prestigious, with IW/Miami being huge as well
(actually biggest) in their own merit, but lacking enormous
tradition of Cincinnati.

Shanghai, Madrid and Paris lack so much. Neither is national
championship and expect Paris, the two virtually have zero
tradition. Paris otoh has some tradition as most prestigious
regular indoor tournament, but YEC is the king of those anyway.
Paris has a terrible slot.
Shanghai has a much better one.
Madrid has an ok slot, but it's shitty conditions.


Rome is by far the biggest non-slam, regular tournament title in
tennis.

[TT]

Pelle Svanslös kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 15:57:
>> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay
>> tournament.
>
> And this correlation makes MC prestigious?

I already answered this on other post.

Why was Hamburg less prestigious than MC/Rome?
...Because it had such different conditions than RG and correlated
poorly with it results-wise. Even Muster said something like "Bleh,
Hamburg is rubbish since its winner never wins RG".

So correlation seems pretty important, even more so than long history
since Hamburg was first played in 1892.

Attn Skriptis: Hamburg is called "German Open"

[*skriptis]

Hamburg was great tune up. It was colder, damper version of clay
tennis, which FO occasionally is.
Just as sometimes you have FO similar warm Rome with baked courts.
Hamburg + MC + Rome was a great swing. All three sea level.

Madrid ruined it all.

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 16:08:
> I definitely rank national championships, Italy, Canada, and
> Monaco above other MS series. No doubts. It's a matter of
> principle and not a "feel".

Hamburg masters was and is known as 'German Open Championships' - more
important than MC?

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

Paris is cold and wet sometimes as well, that's what made trinity
of MC - Rome - Hamburg such a great preparation.

[*skriptis]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

Could be argued it's roughly the same even now.
Remeber MC is not a mandatory event despite offering 1000 pts he's
calculated as one of the 4 mandatory ATP500s.

I'd say:

1. French
2. Italian
3. Monaco/German/Madrid
6. Barcelona

[TT]

*skriptis kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 16:23:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 16:08:
>>> I definitely rank national championships, Italy, Canada, and
>>> Monaco above other MS series. No doubts. It's a matter of
>>> principle and not a "feel".
>>
>> Hamburg masters was and is known as 'German Open Championships' - more
>> important than MC?
>
>
> Could be argued it's roughly the same even now.
> Remeber MC is not a mandatory event despite offering 1000 pts he's
> calculated as one of the 4 mandatory ATP500s.
>
> I'd say:
>
> 1. French
> 2. Italian
> 3. Monaco/German/Madrid
> 6. Barcelona
>
>

Troll is a troll.

[TT]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_German_Open_%E2%80%93_Singles

[*skriptis]

Then yoz tell us why is Monte Carlo, that's not even a mandatory
event, in the same tier as Italian open? That's trolling you
know.

Due to ATP points distribution and scheduling at the moment it's:

1. French
2. Italian
3. a) monaco
b) german open
c) madrid

[*skriptis]

When Nadal retires you'll have Ramos Vibolas types winning Barcelona.

Barcelona "looks" prestigious simply because Nadal plays and wins it.


And return Hamburg to pre FO slot and it will top even Madrid if
they're both kept.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 30.11.2017 16:13, TT wrote:
> Pelle Svanslös kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 15:57:
>>> MC results correlate with RG results better than any other clay
>>> tournament.
>>
>> And this correlation makes MC prestigious?
>
> I already answered this on other post.

Maybe I'll try to find it.

> Why was Hamburg less prestigious than MC/Rome?
> ...Because it had such different conditions than RG and correlated
> poorly with it results-wise. Even Muster said something like "Bleh,
> Hamburg is rubbish since its winner never wins RG".

He did?

> So correlation seems pretty important, even more so than long history
> since Hamburg was first played in 1892.

Correlation-wise Hamburg is just as important as the Italian. What did
Muster say about the Italian?

It's a bit nutty to even speak of correlation, let alone compare them,
when the actual numbers are close to 0.

--
“Donald Trump is the weak man’s vision of a strong man.”
-- Charles Cooke

[Whisper]

TT has lost the plot. I'm sure had Rafa only won it twice he'd never
talk about it. MC's 'prestige' rests on the fact Rafa won it 10 times.
What a homo analysis.



--
"A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[*skriptis]

Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com> Wrote in message:

:)

[Whisper]

On 1/12/2017 1:08 AM, *skriptis wrote:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> *skriptis kirjoitti 30.11.2017 klo 15:03:
>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>
>

> I definitely rank national championships, Italy, Canada, and
> Monaco above other MS series. No doubts. It's a matter of
> principle and not a "feel".
>
> You can disagree but you can't accuse me of having hidden intentions.
>
>
> Of all the other non-national championships, Cincunatti is the
> oldest and most prestigious, with IW/Miami being huge as well
> (actually biggest) in their own merit, but lacking enormous
> tradition of Cincinnati.
>
> Shanghai, Madrid and Paris lack so much. Neither is national
> championship and expect Paris, the two virtually have zero
> tradition. Paris otoh has some tradition as most prestigious
> regular indoor tournament, but YEC is the king of those anyway.
> Paris has a terrible slot.
> Shanghai has a much better one.
> Madrid has an ok slot, but it's shitty conditions.
>
>
> Rome is by far the biggest non-slam, regular tournament title in
> tennis.
>
>

Yes, I've always the same way. The past greats (Laver, Rosewall etc)
all revered IO just behind FO.

IO is sidekick to FO like Robin to Batman. Yes Batman gets top billing,
but Robin adds a certain flavor.

[Whisper]

I'd always take the national championship over any M1000 event. So
Canadian Open, German Open, Swedish Open, Croatian Open etc are all far
more prized than just another big point tune-up. This isn't about
points/field/money, but the honor of being champion of a national open
tennis tournament. Think of them as 'slams that never were, but could
have been' if they had big star players 100 yrs ago when Davis Cup was a
huge deal. Davis Cup gave birth to the 'Grand Slams'. At the time only
USA, Australia, England & France had ever won the Davis Cup, so these
nations became known as the big 4, & thus slams.