Nadal may skip Cincinatti?

Got this link on twitter a few minutes ago, claiming Nadal may skip Cincinatti. I dont know how true/reliable it is, but the reason for the propsed skip is funny: "because it’s geographically in
the middle of nowhere.”

www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/07/report-nadal-may-skip-cincinnati/48536/

Been to Cincinatti on a school basketball tour once.... Beige is probably the best way to describe the place.

PS - Is there a better reason to skip a tournament?

It just backs up my theory about injury at Wimbledon to be honest. Diddly squat to do with the geographical poition of Cincinatti considering how many times he has played there before.

Oooops forgot that we have Montreal first so it suggests what was expected earlier in the year in that he'll look to cut down involvement in as many hard court tournaments as he can to avoid overly stressing the knee.

Is he allowed to having already missed Miami?

The Special Juan wrote:Is he allowed to having already missed Miami?

No. His exemption allows him to skip one masters only.

Born Slippy wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:Is he allowed to having already missed Miami?

No. His exemption allows him to skip one masters only.

Thanks, that's what I thought. We should hope that the ATP wouldn't force someone to play on a surface which could be detrimental to their health but it doubt it.

The Special Juan wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:Is he allowed to having already missed Miami?

No. His exemption allows him to skip one masters only.

Thanks, that's what I thought.  We should hope that the ATP wouldn't force someone to play on a surface which could be detrimental to their health but it doubt it.

That makes no sense.. Assuming he would then play the US Open how would he argue that he couldn't play Cinci because it's detrimental to his health.. The ATP can't let him or anyone pick and choose at random when to play mandatory events until the player qualifies under the exemption rules.. Otherwise it would be anarchy and also unfair to the players that did have to wait until the exemption. That's how professional sports work- if you choose to make a living in that league, you abide by their rules.. Besides.. .the Atp already makes it quite easy for any player to skip a Masters.. Nadal could declare a pulled muscle and pull out without penalty as long as he does a few interviews and press.

Pretty sure Nadal can skip two MS. He's tour debut was 2001, which makes it twelve years of service. His record for the season reads 43-3, his career record reads 626-125. Meaning he started the year on 583-122, comfortably over the 600 match barrier for the second exemption. Unless Im missing something somewhere

It's the first year you play 12 events - Rafa only played 3 in 2001 and therefore does not have 12 years service yet. He will next year.

kingraf wrote:Got this link on twitter a few minutes ago, claiming Nadal may skip Cincinatti. I dont know how true/reliable it is, but the reason for the propsed skip is funny:  "because it’s geographically in
the middle of nowhere.”

www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/07/report-nadal-may-skip-cincinnati/48536/

Been to Cincinatti on a school basketball tour once.... Beige is probably the best way to describe the place.

PS - Is there a better reason to skip a tournament?

"Marca also reports Nadal once had a bad experience at customs at the Cincinnati airport"

A full body search was conducted on the grounds that they suspected he was concealing something in his pants, after noting how many times he fiddled with them in the queue.

What would happen if Rafa did skip it? If he has already skipped 1 mandatory event, which is the limit of what you can miss, and he then skips another... What is the punishment?

His reasoning is sensible. Who on earth thinks anyone can cope with 3 big events in 5 weeks?

If Novak has any sense he'll drop one of the Masters as well

Andy, due to his French rest is the only one who should be putting their body through this torture

I am pretty sure that the sanction is money. Djoko faced exclusion from the bonus pool in 2011 if he did not play Shanghai or Paris as I recall, and he played to save his entitlement to $1m odd. The bottom line is that Nadal wants to play a reduced schedule. I don't see why he doesn't just do it and take whatever punishment is going. It's fair enough for the ATP to expect commitment to the sponsors who pay the players so well. Nadal is the sort of guy who can see that it's a bonus that he can play when he can without having it all.

The sanction should be being banned from his best Masters in the previous year - so IW, Rome or Madrid. However, I've yet to see that applied. He'll come up with a doctor's note at the appropriate time anyway so it won't be an issue.

banbrotam wrote:His reasoning is sensible. Who on earth thinks anyone can cope with 3 big events in 5 weeks?

If Novak has any sense he'll drop one of the Masters as well

Andy, due to his French rest is the only one who should be putting their body through this torture

Surely Nadal had a British rest. 

I wonde whether they should look at moving Canada forward a week, having a 250/500 in between and then Cincinatti.

Ive never really been bothered about the top guys missing some of the masters. Given how far they tend to go in the tournaments and the ridiculous scheduling at times, I can quite forgive the odd "sickie". God knows how much they give for the rest of the year. If Rafa doesnt feel his knee can take both masters then fair enough, hes every right to protect his body,especially how much of it hes given to the sport

Wonder whether the rumour is true?

I don't know why Nadal doesn't just skip Cincy after Roger's Cup claiming sore knees - he can manage his schedule to suit himself by doing this at any given point in the season.

Born Slippy wrote:The sanction should be being banned from his best Masters in the previous year - so IW, Rome or Madrid. However, I've yet to see that applied. He'll come up with a doctor's note at the appropriate time anyway so it won't be an issue.

That would be pretty self-defeating, a rule designed to protect sponsors results when being enforced in even greater disappointment of sponsors.

Yeah, probably why its never been applied. It is in the rules though. A better sanction would be to remove the best masters result at that time.

Born Slippy wrote:Yeah, probably why its never been applied. It is in the rules though. A better sanction would be to remove the best masters result at that time.

I didn't know that was the rule - thanks for putting me right. I agree with your notion as to the better sanction. They can look at points, prize money, or entitlement to partake in the bonus pool. That way only the player suffers.

It makes me feel a bit uncomfortable if the reality is that forcing the schedule on players risks injury of the top players - but there are an awful lot of interests to balance in keeping a Tour going and not least is that of the lesser players who form the base of the pyramid and struggle to make ends meet, so ultimately I think that the system is overall justifiable even if it invariably needs a bit of tinkering.