Singles tennis has become such a one-sided affair that players are quitting matches just for a paycheck.
By BEN ROTHENBERG
July 6, 2017
WIMBLEDON, England — Fiona Wong, a Roger Federer fan from Melbourne, Australia, flew more than 30 hours to see her favorite player at Wimbledon for the first time. She then waited more than 30 hours to get in to see him.
Wong began lining up for tickets at 4 a.m. on Monday, arriving early to ensure that she could buy one of the 500 Centre Court tickets available to those willing to wait overnight in a tent. Her pilgrimage was completed 32 hours after she arrived, when she finally made it to Centre Court to see Federer play.
Wong’s stay was short, however: Federer’s match on Tuesday lasted only 43 minutes because his opponent, Alexandr Dolgopolov, abruptly quit midway through the second set.
“When Dolgopolov started walking toward the net, we were saying, ‘Are you serious?’” Wong said.
Novak Djokovic’s opponent, Martin Klizan, also retired, just 40 minutes into the match before Federer’s. The one-two punch of disappointment left the Centre Court crowd dismayed and players searching for solutions.
“Especially if you walk out on the Centre Court, there is a responsibility,” Djokovic said. “I’m sure they tried their best, but it is what it is.”
The two high-profile withdrawals, known in tennis as retirements, were among seven aborted matches in the first round of the men’s tournament, meaning that more than 10 percent of those matches were not completed. (Steve Darcis retired from his second-round match on Thursday, bringing the total to eight.) The abbreviated matches and the void they leave have turned a spotlight on rules governing payment for players who withdraw.
“I feel for the crowd,” Federer said. “They’re there to watch good tennis, proper tennis.”
With time to fill on its broadcast after the marquee matches fizzled, ESPN assembled an all-hands-on-deck panel of 10 commentators to discuss an issue that seemed more urgent than ever.
“Something needs to be done,” Mary Joe Fernandez, an analyst, said. “We see this too often, year after year.”
It is a particular problem on the men’s side. Since Wimbledon in 2007, there have been 237 aborted matches in the men’s singles draws at Grand Slam tournaments, accounting for 4.58 percent of matches. There have been only 85 in women’s matches, or 1.64 percent.
After two rounds at Wimbledon, the men have had eight or more retirements for the 11th time at a Grand Slam event in the past decade. The women have never had more than six in that span of 41 tournaments.
One common suggestion from the panel and the players is for the Grand Slam events to adopt a rule recently put in place on the ATP Tour: Players are allowed to withdraw from tournaments twice per season and still keep the first-round prize money they would have earned had they taken the court. A lucky loser from the final round of qualifying would fill the spot in the draw, gaining additional compensation with a win.
Though players rarely admit that they are playing a Grand Slam event solely for the prize money, the financial realities are clear. In recent years, prize money has soared at the majors, particularly for early-round losers. Players rely on those checks to sustain an entire season.
At Wimbledon, first-round losers receive £35,000, or roughly $45,000, but only if they take the court and begin the match. A decade ago, first-round losers walked away with £10,000.
Only one man, 24th-ranked Pablo Cuevas, withdrew from Wimbledon before the tournament began this year, forgoing his guaranteed prize money but allowing a lucky loser in. That paycheck might not have mattered for Cuevas, who has already earned $892,530 this year.
For others, though, Grand Slam prize money can be needed sustenance. In one prominent example, an injured Petra Martic won just one total game across the three matches she played in the first rounds of the Australian Open, the French Open and Wimbledon in 2014. She earned $104,940 at the three events, which made up 72 percent of her income in singles that season.
Players Pull Out at Wimbledon, and Calls for Reform Flood In
July 6, 2017
WIMBLEDON, England — Fiona Wong, a Roger Federer fan from Melbourne, Australia, flew more than 30 hours to see her favorite player at Wimbledon for the first time. She then waited more than 30 hours to get in to see him.
Wong began lining up for tickets at 4 a.m. on Monday, arriving early to ensure that she could buy one of the 500 Centre Court tickets available to those willing to wait overnight in a tent. Her pilgrimage was completed 32 hours after she arrived, when she finally made it to Centre Court to see Federer play.
Wong’s stay was short, however: Federer’s match on Tuesday lasted only 43 minutes because his opponent, Alexandr Dolgopolov, abruptly quit midway through the second set.
“When Dolgopolov started walking toward the net, we were saying, ‘Are you serious?’” Wong said.
Novak Djokovic’s opponent, Martin Klizan, also retired, just 40 minutes into the match before Federer’s. The one-two punch of disappointment left the Centre Court crowd dismayed and players searching for solutions.
“Especially if you walk out on the Centre Court, there is a responsibility,” Djokovic said. “I’m sure they tried their best, but it is what it is.”
The two high-profile withdrawals, known in tennis as retirements, were among seven aborted matches in the first round of the men’s tournament, meaning that more than 10 percent of those matches were not completed. (Steve Darcis retired from his second-round match on Thursday, bringing the total to eight.) The abbreviated matches and the void they leave have turned a spotlight on rules governing payment for players who withdraw.
“I feel for the crowd,” Federer said. “They’re there to watch good tennis, proper tennis.”
With time to fill on its broadcast after the marquee matches fizzled, ESPN assembled an all-hands-on-deck panel of 10 commentators to discuss an issue that seemed more urgent than ever.
“Something needs to be done,” Mary Joe Fernandez, an analyst, said. “We see this too often, year after year.”
It is a particular problem on the men’s side. Since Wimbledon in 2007, there have been 237 aborted matches in the men’s singles draws at Grand Slam tournaments, accounting for 4.58 percent of matches. There have been only 85 in women’s matches, or 1.64 percent.
After two rounds at Wimbledon, the men have had eight or more retirements for the 11th time at a Grand Slam event in the past decade. The women have never had more than six in that span of 41 tournaments.
One common suggestion from the panel and the players is for the Grand Slam events to adopt a rule recently put in place on the ATP Tour: Players are allowed to withdraw from tournaments twice per season and still keep the first-round prize money they would have earned had they taken the court. A lucky loser from the final round of qualifying would fill the spot in the draw, gaining additional compensation with a win.
Though players rarely admit that they are playing a Grand Slam event solely for the prize money, the financial realities are clear. In recent years, prize money has soared at the majors, particularly for early-round losers. Players rely on those checks to sustain an entire season.
At Wimbledon, first-round losers receive £35,000, or roughly $45,000, but only if they take the court and begin the match. A decade ago, first-round losers walked away with £10,000.
Only one man, 24th-ranked Pablo Cuevas, withdrew from Wimbledon before the tournament began this year, forgoing his guaranteed prize money but allowing a lucky loser in. That paycheck might not have mattered for Cuevas, who has already earned $892,530 this year.
For others, though, Grand Slam prize money can be needed sustenance. In one prominent example, an injured Petra Martic won just one total game across the three matches she played in the first rounds of the Australian Open, the French Open and Wimbledon in 2014. She earned $104,940 at the three events, which made up 72 percent of her income in singles that season.
Players Pull Out at Wimbledon, and Calls for Reform Flood In
