Rafa : "Seems like I am working all the time for the next generations, and I would love to have something for my generation, noh?"

Rafa and Roger are amongst those 10 players who currently form part of the Players' Council, and in yesterday's press conference, Rafa provided some open discussion on the matters that concern him about the current Tour. Its not the first time that he's come out to state that the length of the Tour is too long, that tennis is both mental and physical and that the current off-season is not long enough to cater for both a rest to re-charge batteries before returning to work and practice.

So that's makes the career shorter for everybody, my opinion, no? And that probably is difficult, have a difficult solution, because we have four Grand Slams, we have nine Masters 1000, and the year is 12 months. But what have a better solution is have a little bit longer stop at the end of the season. I know that they're gonna reduce two weeks next year, but, seriously, is not enough. It's something that I don't gonna have these changes for my generation, but hopefully for the next generations to have a better sports life. Because I think you need two months, two months and a half of rest at the end of the season. You have to practice.

When the current World No. 1 speaks of tennis now being like work when it should be about passion, the changes he seems to be suggesting are that after the US Open, the 2 Masters events and the WTF are pulled forward to October, and that the tennis season can continue for the full 12 months but it is the 250s and 500s that are moved and played at the year end. Tournaments therefore keep rolling, those below the top 50 remain active whilst still giving the opportunity for the higher ranked players to play if they so desire, be it if they are returning from injury or something, or if the top players just want the option of participating in an event. And it would mean a genuine 2-month break.

Could this be a way around keeping players at the top of their game which is what we all want to see??

(Rafa's presser is linked here for the purposes of reading what he has to say on this article's subject matter only.)

Wooffie wrote:Could this be a way around keeping players at the top of their game which is what we all want to see??

Good article, Wooffie.

I hope the tennis season is shortened, to relieve the pressure on the players minds and bodies.

Our bodies have to last us a lifetime.....I think it would be irresponsible of the powers that be if they don't do something to help protect the players,

Solerina

Frankly, Federer played the same tour and never compained about it and coudl win week in week out without complaining much of the length of the tour.

The problem was actually created by Nadal's and its physical tennis. If you make the season shorter, you will make it more intense and more physycal cause all the players will do is train like gladiators on the off season and come back fitter and stronger than even now.

The fact that players get exhausted and tired is the only thing that can actually save tennis and more so those players who rely on shot making more than running around ad nausea.

I very much like what I am seeing at the FO now. Shorter rallies, beautiful tennis and a good risky shot is rewarded.

I come at this from a tennis junkies point of view I don't want the season shortened. These guys get a lot of breaks during the course of the season, a couple of weeks after the Australian, a couple of weeks after the wimby, a couple of more after the US open. In fact most guys play between 20-22 tourneys a year, only the 4 grandslams are two week events so out of 52 weeks in the year these guys are playing like 24 and 25 weeks a year. Many of them find time for well paying exos and Davis Cup as well. Playing 80-90 matches a year means that at most on average you are playing once every 4 or 4.5 days a year.

And Tenez Federer has complained about the length of tour on numerous occassions, so yes he has complained like many of the other pros. Its the travel that really makes it exhausting, Ill give them that.

Wrong. He said the 2010 schedule was a bit heavy cause the O2 was late but said the tour should return to the 2009 and before schedule which were fine.

So your earlier comment that Federer "never" complained about the schedule was inaccurate and untrue, as you now indicate. So its ok for Federer to complain about the schedule and countless others but it isn't ok for Nadal? Do you have to make Nadal the basis of everything wrong with the tour and modern tennis?

He never complained when he was at the top and before Nadal imposed his physical game...and when he did not complain....he suggested to get back to old schedule to have a couple more weeks in the off season.

Once again, problem reading hey?

No its seems like you don't understand the definition of never, and throwing this post hoc justification into the mix doesn't change anything. Lets not get into it, it really isn't a big deal for me if Roger did or didn't complain the fact is I don't want the season shortened. It isn't like Nadal is the first player or the last player to complain about the lengthy of the tour schedule.

Tenez and Nadal mix like oil and water as all ex-606ers know - it seems Nadal is always wrong and is everything that is wrong with tennis.

The season for me is too long. Its not that long ago that the players rankings were calculated from the best 14 results not 18 - this has made a big difference to the calendar as players chase points. And dont forget the game is harder and faster now than the 80s/90s. So its a double whammy. The vested interests of the Super 9, now Master, series have meant that the calendar has got more and more congested, with more and more of the events being played on joint wearing hardcourts. Yes this issue affects all players but it affects those at the top more who play more matches by virtue of winning more. If we want to see players around longer with longer careers then I agree with a shorter season. Most sports have a much longer off-season, but tennis seems hellbent on burn-out. No other highly physical and individual (non-team) sport has a calendar like this. Yes, we want to watch more tennis, but at any cost? Any yes, many players have complained about the scheduling.

Solerina wrote:

Wooffie wrote:Could this be a way around keeping players at the top of their game which is what we all want to see??

Good article, Wooffie.

I hope the tennis season is shortened, to relieve the pressure on the players minds and bodies.

Our bodies have to last us a lifetime.....I think it would be irresponsible of the powers that be if they don't do something to help protect the players,

Solerina

Money talks and tennis players have become slaves, albeit highly paid ones.

But slaves nevertheless.

Rafa seems to be calling for the season to be 12 months, but for the 1000 Masters (assuming Paris) which players have to attend, and the WTF which the top 8 and reserves have to attend, to be moved forward. Thus allowing those at the pinnacle of the game a good 2 months off at the end of the year. The tennis watching public can still have tennis around as there would be 250/500 events to follow.

These young men ... they're not robots. And more and more it comes to pass how unique Federer is in his playing style, but he's not representative of tennis any more. The game is always evolving, and whether its to your taste or not, the vast majority of players make use of today's technology and play a physical baseline game. By the nature of their success, the best of the bunch are the ones that go deeper in the competitions and sometimes it becomes like they eventually have to pay the price for their success. As Rafa says, whoever wins the FO will, the very next day, have to be some place else to start their practice on the grass because there's another tournament to play and then only a week till Wimbledon.

We're all witnessing something unique in tennis now with Djokovic's run. At the moment for him, its motivating, he has purpose because it all leads to something. But how will he feel 12 months from now when he wakes up every day to go and play tennis knowing that every match he plays is just to hang on to what he's got ... that it doesn't improve his ranking in any way.

We want to see the best of these players at all times competing at the best of their ability, and for them to have as long a career as they possibly can ... so surely its time that something has to happen which indeed does benefit those that are playing now and seem to be fighting hard for it.

Wooffie wrote:Rafa seems to be calling for the season to be 12 months, but for the 1000 Masters (assuming Paris) which players have to attend, and the WTF which the top 8 and reserves have to attend, to be moved forward. Thus allowing those at the pinnacle of the game a good 2 months off at the end of the year. The tennis watching public can still have tennis around as there would be 250/500 events to follow.

These young men ... they're not robots. And more and more it comes to pass how unique Federer is in his playing style, but he's not representative of tennis any more. The game is always evolving, and whether its to your taste or not, the vast majority of players make use of today's technology and play a physical baseline game. By the nature of their success, the best of the bunch are the ones that go deeper in the competitions and sometimes it becomes like they eventually have to pay the price for their success. As Rafa says, whoever wins the FO will, the very next day, have to be some place else to start their practice on the grass because there's another tournament to play and then only a week till Wimbledon.

We're all witnessing something unique in tennis now with Djokovic's run. At the moment for him, its motivating, he has purpose because it all leads to something. But how will he feel 12 months from now when he wakes up every day to go and play tennis knowing that every match he plays is just to hang on to what he's got ... that it doesn't improve his ranking in any way.

We want to see the best of these players at all times competing at the best of their ability, and for them to have as long a career as they possibly can ... so surely its time that something has to happen which indeed does benefit those that playing now and seem to be fighting hard for it.

I am afraid that he is already feeling the physical effects of his exertions. The strapping around his left knee does not look promising.

Tenez and Nadal mix like oil and water as all ex-606ers know - it seems Nadal is always wrong and is everything that is wrong with tennis.
-----------------

I certainly don;t remember so many issues about time taking between points, gamesmanship and long season before his arrival.

Back then the rules were the rules and the only thing worth discussing was the relative talent of tennis players.

Obviously not the case anymore.

Well, Federer never had the need to complain, his tour in 2008 was thus...

09.01.08 - AAMI Classic, Kooyong (AUS) hard
14.01.08 - Australian Open, Melbourne (AUS) hard
03.03.08 - Dubai Duty Free Men's Open, Dubai (UAE) carpet
10.03.08 - Pacific Life Open, Indian Wells (USA) hard
26.03.08 - Sony Ericsson Open, Miami (USA) hard
14.04.08 - Estoril Open, Estoril (POR) clay
21.04.08 - Masters Series Monte-Carlo, Monte Carlo (MON) clay
05.05.08 - Campionati BNL d'Italia, Rome (ITA) clay
12.05.08 - Masters Series Hamburg, Hamburg (GER) clay
25.05.08 - Roland Garros, Paris (FRA) clay
09.06.08 - Gerry Weber Open, Halle (GER) grass
23.06.08 - Wimbledon, London (GBR) grass
21.07.08 - Rogers Masters, Toronto (CAN) hard
28.07.08 - Western & Southern Financial Group Masters, Cincinnati (USA) hard
10.08.08 - Olympic Games, Beijing (CHN) hard
25.08.08 - US Open, New York (USA) hard
13.10.08 - Mutua Madrilena Masters Madrid, Madrid (ESP) carpet
20.10.08 - Davidoff Swiss Indoors, Basel (SUI) hard
27.10.08 - BNP Paribas Masters, Paris (FRA) carpet
09.11.08 - Tennis Masters Cup, Shanghai (CHN) hard

Giving him a whole month off in February, 2/3rds September, 1/2 November, and all of December.

He has said in the past that..."a slightly less taxing season is a win-win for players, tournaments and fans. 'We are speaking of cutting the calendar by a couple of weeks. I hope we can have some kind of compromise. We all want peace and harmony.'

He's also stated quite plainly that burnout is a big worry for all the top players...

http://tvnz.co.nz/tennis-news/federer-wants-shorter-season-3886853

Its not just him, they are all feeling the effects of the tennis schedule as it stands.

Tenez would blame Rafa for the third world debt if he could!

Rafa is giving his opinion which he is perfectly entitled to do, as any other individual. I cannot see why anyone should object.

He is on the players council, he knows his own mind and expresses it....what's wrong with that?

I think the season is far far too long but I've thought that for ages now, and there should be a period at the end of the year that all players can rest and recoup. Of course they are in a priviledged position, earning big bucks for what they do...but they are only human, and sometimes enough is enough.

You are omitting a part of this same interview where he says things were working well before 2010. ..well the link certainly says so.

Tennis is not all about Nadal and Federer. Many other lower ranked players are trying to make a living out of it and this is why Roger talks about "compromise".

What really kills Nadal and now the very top players is the fact that a semi final or final of best of 3 takes 3 or 4 hours between Nadal, Djoko and Murray, Ferrer and now Federer is being dragged into those ridiculous physcal battles where there is a need to gasp for air for 40 secs between points to be able to keep on rallying senselessly.

It is also the fault of organisers that have produced slower conds so that people get to watch those gruelling rallies.

Look at the O2 2010 semis and check the contrast bewteen a shot maker and players relying on their lungs to win.

This is what kills Nadal...not the length of the season...well of course the length of the season looks much longer for him than it does for Federer because of his physical game.

Nadal had rested 2 full months, at least 6 weeks before the O2, yet he was completely knackered after his semi v Murray. Federer had played almost full schedule for 6 weeks before the O2..yet he was fresher in the final than Nadal.

This proves exactly what's wrong with Nadal's game.

Sure players need 6 weeks for the off season. That's what they had before 2010 and they should just revert to that.

Afetr Bending the time rule between points, now Nadal wants to bend the time between seasons.

Can't he just play tennis like everybody else?

"You are omitting a part of this same interview where he says things were working well before 2010. ..well the link certainly says so"

Unless my browser is not displaying the content properly, I can't see any statement to that effect Tenez.

But we are not talking of gruelling matches, but the gruelling schedule, which many players are and have been complaining about for years and the amount of time to recuperate properly in an off season.


But why are you singling out Nadal Tenez, he sits on the players council, this is a statement from all of them, not just him ?

And I wish you'd give up on the "wasting time" trip, I think that's been overcooked beyond recognition on here and doesn't really add to the content of this article, does it ?

It is recognised that many other players are trying to make a living out of the game which is why it is stated that 250s/500s are played towards the end of the year which they can participate in, earn ranking points and income.

This is not just about how Nadal plays the game of tennis, so there is no need to make him case specific. He is a product of his era. Federer has to be taken as a case apart, because Djokovic, Murray, Soderling, Del Potro, Ferrer, Tsonga, Monfils, Verdasco etc. etc. play the game in an entirely different way. Are these guys at 22/23/24 years old going to totally change into Federer clones? Not a chance. Look at the Ferrer/Monfils match today. How physical was that? Tennis today has evolved into what it is. Equally because of the age we live in, it is absolutely accessible all year round through satellite TV, the internet and the like. It is more popular, it is more accessible ... but surely for the stars that make it ... they've got to be able to take a break from the demands of it all.

I agree Wooffie, and I remember Henman bemoaning the length of the tour way back then.

Its not as if this has suddenly become flavour of the month and it is certainly not only Nadal that is trying to get a decent off season written into the schedule.

Again, no problem here with Rafa expressing his opinion and he certainly isn't the only player to bemoan the length of the season virtually every champion does. But here is the thing you only have to play 4 grandslams, 8 masters, 4 ATP 500s, and 2 250s. That is 18 tournaments for guys ranked in the top 30. That is 22 weeks of tennis a year assuming that you get to working end of every single tournament that you enter. If the schedule is so brutal and grueling why is it that players find time for several meaningless exhibitions over the course of the year. Some guys play doubles as well.

As for injuries and burnout this occurred way before the current set up of the tour. Footballers have a much, much more gruelling schedule and play a much more physical game. I haven't seen any appreciable increase in injuries or burnout among the top stars. Wilander in the 80s burned out by his mid 20s, so did borg. The tour schedule is tough but it is a big money business. And as for the physical nature of the game well every modern sport is more physical than it was 25 and 30 years ago.

Tenez wrote:
It is also the fault of organisers that have produced slower conds so that people get to watch those gruelling rallies.

People love the long rallies tenez, I know I do I much rather watch a difficult point with a lot running and a combination of big shots and good defense than short rallies. And if you listen to the cheer that errupts from the fans after a gruelling lengthy exchange and the oohs and aahhs that take place you would see that most people unlike yourself like the modern game. So it isn't the organizers fault, maybe the majority of tennis fans lack the good taste that you have, or have a different opinion of the game. I know that I almost stopped watching tennis after the Sampras/Ivansivic wimbeldon final, nothing, nothing is as dull as a serving contest. So your gripe isn't with Nadal, it isn't with the ATP, it isn't with tour organizers. This is what the people like and want, and that is what they pay to see, damn them for their lack of taste and how they lack your refined nature.

socal1976 wrote:

Tenez wrote:
It is also the fault of organisers that have produced slower conds so that people get to watch those gruelling rallies.

People love the long rallies tenez, I know I do I much rather watch a difficult point with a lot running and a combination of big shots and good defense than short rallies. And if you listen to the cheer that errupts from the fans after a gruelling lengthy exchange and the oohs and aahhs that take place you would see that most people unlike yourself like the modern game. So it isn't the organizers fault, maybe the majority of tennis fans lack the good taste that you have, or have a different opinion of the game. I know that I almost stopped watching tennis after the Sampras/Ivansivic wimbeldon final, nothing, nothing is as dull as a serving contest. So your gripe isn't with Nadal, it isn't with the ATP, it isn't with tour organizers. This is what the people like and want, and that is what they pay to see, damn them for their lack of taste and how they lack your refined nature.

I dont enjoy long rallies when they are defensive with neither player willing to go for the kill. this is the reason that some players spend 3-4 hours on court, while most would call this epic battles, I generally never do. A long rally is only ever good if it is attack and defence with the upper hand shifting between both players, and some coming up to the net. I dont like players who only wait for UE's. I also agree that a serving contest is not great tennis (IMO), it does not have those exciting ooh and aahs you get with a really good rally!!
I'm selfishly happy with the current length of the season, I guess players should manage their schedules more, I dont think they need to play all tournaments!!! look at the williams sisters, They were tops with less appearances, maybe extreme but you have to pace your self....

Exactly, mm15 I don't like watching grinders who don't hit winners or who lack the ability to finish a point. But objectively, none of the top players have problems with hitting winners and other than Ferrer the classical grinders are maybe less successful on tour than they have ever been. The modern game is dominated by power baseliners who can also move and defend. Soderling hits a lot of winners, so does Djokovic, so does Del Po, and Murray has great variety. Even Nadal hits jaw dropping shots switching from offense to defense. I wouldn't call any of today's best players classical grinders maybe with exception of Ferrer and what he is one guy in the top ten. But I agree there has to be both an offensive and a defensive element to make the rally enjoyable, not just waiting for someone to make an error all the time.

In my mind shortening the schedule hurts the journeyman and the guys struggling to make it on tour. If you are top player and you don't need the money do what Federer has done, just don't enter as many tournaments. You are only required to enter 18 tournaments (19 if you include year end for top 8 players) all season. That is exactly 22 weeks of tennis in a 52 week calendar.

socal1976 wrote:
In my mind shortening the schedule hurts the journeyman and the guys struggling to make it on tour. If you are top player and you don't need the money do what Federer has done, just don't enter as many tournaments. You are only required to enter 18 tournaments (19 if you include year end for top 8 players) all season. That is exactly 22 weeks of tennis in a 52 week calendar.

I agree, the journeyman needs a ranking to be successful and also money. But they also don’t stay long enough in all tournaments for the long tour schedule to be tiring, I mean round 2 and round three exits can’t be compared to seeds that almost always end up in the final and hence always play the 2-3 extra matches per tourney! Federer is right, compromise is needed. Why should the longer season disadvantage the better players? Also why should a shorter season limit the journeyman or upcoming player? That’s way I think it's all about scheduling…the ATP can reduce the number of compulsory tournements.

This is a very interesting discussion and I think it is fair to say there are valid arguments on both "sides". Another aspect to consider is commercial viability of individual tournaments and the pressures on the shoulders of tournament directors as well as making the sport more globally representative.

It seems that perhaps tennis puts its top players too high on the pedestal resulting in demands of having them in tournaments to ensure the commercial success of those tournaments.

On a separate matter I wonder whether prize money differentials (absolute differences) has tracked similar differences elsewhere in the modern society.

But we are not talking of gruelling matches, but the gruelling schedule, which many players are and have been complaining about for years and the amount of time to recuperate properly in an off season.
----------------------------

The season woudl be much less gruelling without those gruelling matches, don't you think? How can you differenciate both? McEnroe and Connors used to play many more matches than that in a season and never complained. ...or no more like you and I woudl complain about not having enough holidays. yet, it doesn;t prevent Federer and Nadal to do more travelling in the off season for Exhibitions or even play early in January tournaments they could skip or even the Quatar exho. The lower ranked players don't have that luxury to make money just by invitation.

I don't think many other players complain about the season. It has got to be the top 8 at most and amongst those, I can only think of Nadal, Roddick, and probably Murray and Djoko. Federer at 29 of course will want to have it shorter but he played all his career a very intense schedule without complaining.


On this issue, once again, I'd have to side with Federer. The schedule is fine. Just 6 weeks at end of season, is good...and that is from a 29 old player who has done it all and could retire a happy man.

Nadal was a spent force at 23 and was only able to carry on thanks to latest medical treatments, so of course for him the season will always be too long.

I think that the tour should be scheduled to allow more 250/500 events to be held near the end of the year. My only problem with this is that it benefits the top players if the 1000 events were held during times of the year that slightly favours them. I think if changes were made it becomes like football in a way. My arguement is if say Nadal (not singling him out) as an example has a niggle or is feeling slightly exhausted and is due to play Rome and is defending champion, why not pull out of the event? If changes were made it would become ranking v career longevity. Hence with football were teams pride themselves on where they finish in the league ahead of cup success due to money. If I was a player and the demands of the tour would hampen my longevity, I would then play less events. It may affect ranking, but if I wanted a long career it would be a sacrifice I would make. Changes in the season would make it easier for top 8 players in 1000 events to protect their ranking.

Tenez wrote:Nadal was a spent force at 23 and was only able to carry on thanks to latest medical treatments, so of course for him the season will always be too long.

Come on Tenez, do you think it benefits the debate for you to claim that Nadal was a spent force at 23 and to always attack the man in every single post? I mean you should try to be fair and at least somewhat objective. Nadal was a spent force at 23, didn't the guy just win the US open, wimbeldon, and french open last year? Is Rafa Nadal the first tennis player ever to suffer injury problems? And buddy I have seen numerous quotes where Fed has complained about the length of the season, they all at one time or another complain about the length of the season so fed is not this holier than thou angel who never complains.

Legendkillar that is the whole point though. Why should the top players be given a scheduling boost to protect their ranking? The top guys don't need any help the guy ranked number 88 and struggling to make a living needs to be encouraged. In tennis the money and the perks are already weighted towards the top guys. That is why I want as many events as possible with a much prize money as possible so that the little guys can get their tiny sliver. The top guys are only required to enter 18 tournaments so if the schedule is so brutal enter only 18 tournaments. Players already have a lot of leeway in their schedule.

socal1976 wrote:Legendkillar that is the whole point though. Why should the top players be given a scheduling boost to protect their ranking? The top guys don't need any help the guy ranked number 88 and struggling to make a living needs to be encouraged. In tennis the money and the perks are already weighted towards the top guys. That is why I want as many events as possible with a much prize money as possible so that the little guys can get their tiny sliver. The top guys are only required to enter 18 tournaments so if the schedule is so brutal enter only 18 tournaments. Players already have a lot of leeway in their schedule.

If they change the schedule, then they should at 1000 make all players play in the first round and not receive byes. Makes it more of an even field IMO. Like most posters have said, this discussion isn't anything new. The Williams sisters don't play full schedules. As you can see ranking is not an issue if you know you can play your best tennis against anyone.

I don't know legend I think the current schedule and set of the ATP master's is good enough if the discussion is the strain we put on the best players why make them play an extra first round match? That increases their schedule by like 10 percent without adding any additional tournaments. Not to mention that it would make it very hard to go on a hot streak like Djoko's and win 4 masters on the trot. Can you imagine playing a final in madrid on a sunday and then having to play on Monday in Rome or even tuesday? That in my mind makes a bad situation worse instead of better.

Well I think if they are looking to reduce the calendar and move events around, you won't see the top players playing masters 250/500 events. For example I couldn't see Rafa playing Barcelona if the schedule was tweeked.

And this article is not designed to house those kind of references, Tenez, or would you also be in favour of footballers being denied the latest cruciate ligament surgery where once they would have been cast on the scrap heap.

Back on topic. A few have made comments about the sports journeymen. Have you not registered that there isn't a call to shorten the season for everyone? What is being discussed is that tennis continues throughout the whole year so that it gives these guys the continued opportunity to play. Its just that for those at the top of the sport where they have to play the two 1000 Masters and where they have to turn up for the WTF, if Paris and the WTF were moved earlier then the players would still fulfill their commitments, the tournament directors still get their players and the top players get a longer break - if they so wish - with the sports journeymen still playing till the year end but in the 250/500 series.

Also, this isn't just Nadal having a whinge here. What he's giving us an insight to is the voicing of ideas that are obviously being discussed within the Players Council. Of the 10 members that make up the Council, there are 4 from the top 50 (I think), and they are Roger, Rafa, Fernando Gonzalez and Sam Querry. All differing kind of players, but those in the lesser ranks are represented too so also have their voice. Which is why a 12 month season is there for those who wish to take it, but there has to be enough of the professional players calling for changes to the length of the season for the Council to be discussing it in the first place and wanting to introduce changes that benefit them.

Well wooffie, I wouldn't be opposed to moving up Paris and the WTF, but keep the year round schedule of 250s and 500s. But if none of the top guys show up for those events doesn't it result in those events losing some of their viability? But a minor tweek to give the players an extra two weeks at the end of the season would be fine with me but I wouldn't want to cut down on any events that is for sure. So would we now have 250 and 500 events after London, well one problem is that no top players would ever enter those events and they might not be financially viable as a result.

All the points I make here refer to the physicality of Nadal's game which is very much linked to the subject of this thread.

Now if you don;t want to see it, fine. But it is a simple fact that this isseue about long and short seasons has become of great importance since Nadal's arrival.

Wooffie wrote:And this article is not designed to house those kind of references, Tenez, or would you also be in favour of footballers being denied the latest cruciate ligament surgery where once they would have been cast on the scrap heap.

As explained, the point was just to highligth the physicality of Nadal's game, therefore supporting my point that the shorter season woudl benefit him more than other players like the extra time taken between points does.

The fact that PRP wasn't legal and suddenly became legal is another matter I do not wish to discuss here.

We are going to have to agree to disagree, because I think I understood you perfectly well the first time round. I am, however, very pleased to read of your self moderation on your final point because it has no place on the subject matter of this article, so well done on that.

Anyone can trawl the internet to find articles of players discussing the length of the season.

The players see a potential World Cup, 32 nations playing once every two years, as one way of streamlining the burgeoning season and giving them a longer off-season to rest and recover.

"That is the highest priority, because players feel like the season is just too long," Djokovic said after progressing to the third round of the Australian Open. "I think the most important thing is that the top players are together right now, and they share more or less the same opinion," he said.

"I think it's time we shifted back a bit and we get a proper off-season really," Federer, who has never got further than the quarter-finals, told reporters. "Four weeks is just not enough off-season really," Federer said.

... but Roger seems content enough with 6 weeks. Back in 2005, Andy Roddick was complaining about the length of the season, but perhaps one of the highest profile players on this subject is Bjorn Borg. Inherent in his decision to quit was that he would not commit to playing a statutory number of tournaments in a year and I pull the following quote from this article.

I have no reason for any regrets. When I boycotted the Australian, I was trying to make a statement. I had made my mind up. My point was that a player requires some time to himself, he can't keep rushing from one court to another all the time without a break.

They all heard me say that, but no one did anything about it. So I did it myself, I skipped the Australian and gave myself the time I needed. That was the only way I could think of, to do it. I have always played my tennis and lived my life on my own terms, I have no regrets

Even back then, Borg was keen to have his own down time away from tennis. Rafa is elected to the Council and cannot be the lone voice in calling for change in moving the Masters and WTF forward because the Council has be reflective of the majority of the Players' opinion.

I'm trying very hard to understand why it is only Nadal that plays a physical game and that style makes his career shorter because of it.

Maybe some posters should actually read Wooffies link in the OP, so they could understand what he was talking about.

I don't see any reason why the season should be any shorter. Certain players making the most noise about this are in the habit of playing events they don't need to, which makes anything they say on the subject quite meaningless.

As loathe as I am to admit it, I actually agree on this point with bogbrush. Nadal entered Monte Carlo and Barcelona this year and could of easily skipped those events. Although he needed another 500 pointer after he withdrew from Dubai. Personally, I don't really accept the argument that shortening the season will lengthen these players careers. Take connors for example the guy played at a high level till he was 39 years old and he was infamous for turning up at every single event that offered any type of prize money. He always played among the busiest schedules of any player.

Interesting point regarding Borg. Ultimately the game lost one of its greatest stars because of these issues. On the face of it a four week off-season does seem a little daft - that's not much of a "season" - better to call it something else (a vacation?).

I thnk we all agree that 4 weeks is too short. 6 weeks is fine, especially when considering that top players do take 4 or even 6 other weeks off during the year (after the AO and After Wimby for instance).

Rotterdam this year started 1 week after the AO and Dubai 3 weeks after the AO. Players from countries who progress in the Davis Cup either play and therefore cut into any break after Wimbledon, or have to withdraw. Most posts have centered on the physical aspect amidst comments that tournaments should be dropped or those with the physical game seem to shout the loudest.

However Rafa brought out the mental aspect too, and lets not forget that this plays a very large part for those players at the top of the game. There's the constant pressure about maintaining a ranking, or working to improve on it. Djokovic is having the time of his life right now, but I do wonder what it will feel like for him come January when he faces playing for nothing other than keeping hold of what he's got week after week after week. And its not just the tennis at tournaments. I read recently a fan's report of Rafa turning up to practice at one of the US events and he just became utterly dismayed by the sheer volume of people there watching. At Monte Carlo this year, there were a mass of security guys just keeping the crowds back to make a narrow walkway for Roger to get back to the locker room, but all the time people are shouting his name and pushing things towards his face. At Rome, security guards held hands to form a ring around Rafa so that he could run from the stadium to the players area. I know players at tournaments are fair game and I know that they get paid an awful amount of money for what they do ... but no-one can really understand what that constant barrage must feel like. So I think they deserve a good length of time at the end of the season to get away from all of that too, and to have some semblance of a normal life.

Wooffie you make a good argument I wouldn't be opposed to a six week break. And certainly the travel, the media commitments and the constant attention also have away of wearing on the player. Interviews, photoshoots, press conferences, autograph signing all are part of it so you can't just look at their matchplay commitments when assessing the whole picture.

For more info related US Open Tennis 2011, Schedule, Prize Money and many more visit altiusdirtectory.com