[career-builder]

Interesting article about Bobby Reynolds, the LA draw, and the ATP Pension program. I never knew how their pension program really worked, so I found this real interesting. In Bobby's case, a badly injured player is entering tournaments week after week primarily to work on getting into the ATP Pension plan someday.


Reynolds needs to immobilize his badly damaged left wrist for 6 weeks, but has changed his playing style to be able to play the last few weeks, solely to get to 10 ATP tournaments this year, and therefore get another qualifying year in the ATP pension plan.

Under the ATP plan, you have to play 10 main tour events in a calendar year (and Slams do not count, since they are ITF, not ATP) to get a qualifying year. You then have to have 5 qualifying years in order to get the pension. LA is Reynolds' 10th tourney for the year, and he now has 3 years in. And now he can leave the tour and get the medical treatment he needs.

He hasn't won a match since Miami. Yet he refused to exit the tour til he got in his 10 tourneys for the year. You can say, as the article points out, the guy is injured, and he prevented other healthy players from getting into draws. Or you can argue, as he does, that he earned the right to be in draws due to his ranking (he was #63 in February, a career high), and he earned the right to play the tourneys injured or not, to qualify for his pension year.

Here's the story

http://www.tennisreporters.net/reynolds072709.html

[freddystone]

I had no clue.

[berdyanskdotsu]

eek. That's a rough decision, but I can see why he's looking out for his long term interests.

On a MUCH smaller scale (infinitesimal, even), I can relate. When I was 13, I broke my left arm at the first tennis practice of the summer. I played the remainder of the summer wtih my left arm in a cast past my elbow (which made tossing the ball to serve rather a challenge), and hitting all one-handed slice backhands, instead of two-handed drives.

Obviously, no pension was at stake. But given a choice between not playing at all, and playing somewhat crappy tennis, I chose the latter.

[TheBest-Host]

I never thought about it in terms of an individual sport. Wow!

But, it's a reality. He is a player that is going to have a hard time reaching 5 years. He just couldn't let this year not count.

[cinggooft]

This explains a lot because other players have played injured, too.

Do Challengers count? They're run by the ATP

[secondmertg]

Eye-opening! Thanks so much, Moose!

[jq0AFTTC]

This explains a lot because other players have played injured, too.

Do Challengers count? They're run by the ATP

Apparently not. He had already played 7 ATP tournaments and 5 Challengers before Roland Garros.

[career-builder]

This explains a lot because other players have played injured, too.

Do Challengers count? They're run by the ATP

No, M8. Challengers do not count. Only non-Slam, main Tour events.

And you are correct, it explains a whole lot. Really a good insight into an aspect of the career of a tennis player that we don't give a lot of thought to, yet is extremely important to their thinking and scheduling.

[minowz]

Interesting....and brutal

[loginptsa]

Thanks for posting this article, Moose. Very interesting. I also had no idea about all of this.

While I can understand how players who lost a chance to get into main draws could be upset- I truly don't think that anyone else can judge here. I think that most of us have had to make similar life compromises. You do what you have to do- to look out for yourself and your loved ones- especially when such life "rules" dictate such decisions- AND when you ain't the one who made up us such rules.

[Super-Luser]

Thanks for posting. I also had no idea...

P.S. Someone with an inside info could have made a lot of $$$ by beting against him...

[berdyanskdotsu]

Thanks for posting. I also had no idea...

P.S. Someone with an inside info could have made a lot of $$$ by beting against him...

POssibly. But it can't have been much of a secret that he hadn't hit a single two-handed backhand in his last several matches (nor had he won any), so I can't imagine he had favorable odds in recent matches.

[Super-Luser]

POssibly. But it can't have been much of a secret that he hadn't hit a single two-handed backhand in his last several matches (nor had he won any), so I can't imagine he had favorable odds in recent matches.

Sure, but you don't need really favorable odds if the desired outcome is virtually assured. Just put max allowed every time he plays...

[freddystone]

Sure, but you don't need really favorable odds if the desired outcome is virtually assured. Just put max allowed every time he plays...

Suliso, I didn't know you were Italian.