Posted by Peter Bodo, TENNIS.com
KEY BISCAYNE, Fla. -- The WTA Tour announced its much-anticipated Roadmap 2010 here at the Sony Ericsson Open in Miami just the other day, and it has two primary features that will affect tennis fans directly: a shortened and streamlined schedule, and a more fan-friendly structure that promises more consistent delivery of stars and rivalries. This is an attempt to emasculate the 800-pound gorilla in the WTA parlor -- the proliferation of withdrawals (with injury usually cited as the reason) in recent years.
While I understand WTA CEO Larry Scott's claim that the women's season has been too long, how much does that actually matter if nobody bothers playing during the season? This "Blame the Brutal Endless Season" trope gives the players, the WTA and the tournament directors a nice washcloth for face-saving, but the hole in it is so big that even Maria Sharapova could put a serve through it. If some of these women played any less, they would disappear.
Consider Justine Henin, the frail but steely dynamo who is presently the only living woman who looks like she's got enough mojo to foil Serena Williams' Goldfinger-esque plan to achieve complete world tennis domination. Last year, Henin played 68 singles matches (she was 60-8). Her male counterpart, Roger Federer, played 97 matches -- roughly a third more. That's an enormous difference.
Sharapova played the same number as Henin, while ATP No. 2 Rafael Nadal played 72, a surprisingly low number, but still more than the top two women. Nikolay Davydenko (ATP No. 3) logged 96 matches, but Amelie Mauresmo, the WTA No. 3, played a measly 65. Williams, incidentally, squeezed just 16 matches (but note that she played two Grand Slam events) into her loaded Filofax.
Oh sure, there were injury and illness issues, some of which actually were legitimate. But the numbers don't lie. My overall sense is that the WTA is dealing with serious commitment drift (translation: lazy, whiny, no-can-do players). These players certainly have become "crossover" stars; they're as out of touch with reality as most Hollywood celebrities. This is especially annoying when you add elements like equal prize money into the debate. How about equal commitment for equal pay or respect?
The Roadmap contains some fine ideas, including the four big mandatory combined events (Indian Wells, Key Biscayne, Madrid and Beijing). But the rest of the WTA plan is driven by a complicated, obtuse formula based on spreading the talent. Why didn't the WTA come up with a transparent, sturdy system comparable to the ATP's formula, which stresses the Grand Slams, nine mandatory "Masters"-type events and the tour championships? Wouldn't that be good for tennis? Wouldn't that be good for promoting "equality"?
I'd like to see real equality (the four combined events is a good start): women and men playing a comparable schedule. Equality isn't always about money.
Join Peter Bodo's next chat, Wednesday, April 4 at 1 p.m. ET.
