For some time now, players have been complaining about the calendar; one of their chief complaints was that playing in back-to-back Masters Series events overtaxed their health. This year, the ATP took action, outlining a series of changes to be implemented for 2009.
It was clear that, in order to pacify the players on the calendar issue, some events would have to be either dropped or demoted.
The German Tennis Federation and Rothebaum Sports GMBH (aka Hamburg) struck first, filing its federal lawsuit against the ATP in the U.S. District Court of Delaware on March 28th. Monte Carlo Country Club and Societe Monegasque Pour L’Exploitation Du Tournoi de Tennis followed, filing its suit in the same federal court on April 9th. Why? Well, both could possibly be stripped of their Tennis Masters Series status!
Well, so what?
I have two words for you, folks: Chicken Little. In addition, these lawsuits smack of courthouse blackmail. I’ll drop my suit if you give me what I want. Back off, ATP.
Ironically, neither Monte Carlo nor Hamburg has lost its elite status yet, and may not under the proposed senior level three-tier plan. Both can still apply to be top tier tournaments.
I believe that Hamburg's case is a lost cause. Monte Carlo's suit, while it may not have legal muster, appears to be settlement bound. In this instance, both entities want to protect their tournaments’ elite status.
Monte Carlo’s pleadings read:
Melodramatic of them, no? Especially considering that Monte Carlo and Hamburg, who are listed as "likely/potential" candidates to be downgraded in 2009, aren't in any immediate danger of losing their luster.
Hamburg’s lawsuit is more straightforward (and less literary), saying it believes that the ATP has been “hijacked” by a majority of its board of directors and “certain executives.” Curiously, Hamburg doesn’t bother identifying all of the defendants in its lawsuit, instead choosing to list (and blame) nine John Does:
Monte Carlo argues that the ATP's plan will harm the players by (a) restricting the number of top tier tournaments available and (b) capping the amount of prize money and other compensations that players could potentially earn if the tournaments are forced to compete with one another. In truth, it seems like they are more concerned with the latter, and their own outlay of cash.
Welcome, Monte Carlo, to the world in which other tournaments operate in. With their current TMS status and guaranteed draw, they avoid the Dubai effect of paying for player attendance.
Monte Carlo also complains it may lose its fan and tourism base if it is downgraded to “second-tier” status. Mind, Monte Carlo is not slated to become a Challenger or a Futures event. It has been a TMS event since 2000, when the TMS was formed. Prior to 2000, it held elite status granted to it in 1989 when it was a Super-9 Series event (the TMS’ predecessor).
Monte Carlo's 10-Euro ticket-buying fan base is comprised mostly of locals; the tourism generated from the event is made up of individuals who cannot only afford to fly into Monte Carlo (via helicopter), but also stay in posh digs, eat in five-star restaurants, and take in the Med with a magnum or two of Dom Perignon. I suspect the same millionaires that attend Monte Carlo this week will be the ones who will come back, year-in and year-out, regardless if the event remains first-tier or not. Their purpose for attending the tournament is social, and they probably do not know Roger Federer from Donald Young. I mean, really, do we think they’re just flying to Monte Carlo to watch some dirtball?
Both the Monte Carlo and Hamburg lawsuits are fashioned as anti-trust cases, in other words, they think the ATP is granting a monopoly to the new elite eight tournaments. Did Monte Carlo or Hamburg worry that they had cornered the market on tennis elitism under the current system? Doubtful. They didn’t think about it and they didn’t care — until now.
Let's play devil's advocate and say that both keep their elite status; would either care that they are part of a monopoly that other fine tournaments are not a part of?
The fuss obviously comes down to money. Well, no duh. But the reality is that the lawsuits or the possible change in either tournaments’ status doesn’t amount to a hill of beans to fans of the game or the players. Hamburg and Monte Carlo are both clay tournaments that lead up to Roland Garros; fans will continue to attend, and the players will still come to each in order to ready themselves on the rich red soil of Europe for the French Open.
So, two tournaments have filed lawsuits as preemptive strikes. So what?
--Lisa
