Tennis at the high level is very much a sport of one-upmanship and the four Grand Slams are not different in that respect. Be it new facilities such as retractable roofs, the number of stadium courts or prize money there is always competition between the quartet and the US Open has once again taken the lead when it comes to prize money.
 
This year’s tournament at New York’s Flushing Meadow, which begins in earnest on August 30 and runs until September 12, will officially offer the richest purse in tennis history, at over $US22.6 million, with the singles winners pocketing at least $US 1.7 million apiece.
 
In total the prize fund shows a 7% increase of  $US 1 million from the 2009 figure but because of the configuration of the US Open series, the singles champions that succeed Juan Martin Del Potro and Kim Clijsters can potentially earn an extra $US 1 million.
 
Rafael Nadal’s prize fund from the two most recent majors amounted to the US dollar equivalent of $2.9 million with fractionally more going into the Spaniard’s account from Wimbledon than the French Open.
 
The US Open series was inaugurated in 2004 as a way to focus more attention on North  American tennis tournaments by getting more of them on domestic television. Points are awarded for each event in the ten tournament series and in 2005 Kim Clijsters became the first player to win $2.2 million (the largest payday ever in women's sports) by beating Mary Pierce of France in the US Open final.
 
Three years later Roger Federer won the US Open series and went on to win the US Open, winning $1.4 million plus the US Open Series bonus of $1 million, bringing his prize winning total to $2.4 million.
 
The US Open series involves ten events beginning with the Atlanta Tennis Championships on July 19 followed a week later by the WTA Tour’s Bank of the West Classic in Stanford, California and the ATP World Tour’s Farmers Classic in Los Angeles. The following week the men head across the country to the Legg Mason Tennis Classicpresented by Geico in Washington DC while the women move down the West Coast for the Mercury Insurance Open in San Diego.
 
Masters 1000 series action comes next in Canada on the ATP World Tour at the Rogers Masters presented by National Bank in Toronto while Cincinnati’s Lindner Family Tennis Center is the venue for the Western & Southern Financial Group Women's Open. Week 5 sees a straight swap with the women heading north to Montreal and the men going in the opposite direction to Cincinnati.
 
Then the two tours finally meet on August 22 for the Pilot Pen Tennis at  the Yale University complex, New Haven, Connecticut before the series comes to a climax with the actual US Open.  
 
The base prize money and bonus prize money thru the quarterfinals is illustrated below:
2010 US OPEN PRIZE MONEY FOR TOP FINISHERS

After 11 hours & 5 minutes, John Isner had the most memorable match of his life.  Both were playing their best tennis & to break no only one record, but several others too.  They both serve outstanding to keep holding on.

Vital statistics
Match duration: 11 hours, five minutes
Fifth set duration: Eight hours, 11 minutes
Total number of games: 183
Fifth set number of games: 138
Total number of points: 980
Isner aces: 112
Mahut aces: 103
Combined aces: 215
Isner winners: 246
Mahut winners: 244

Tennis Channel, the only 24-hour, television-based multimedia destination dedicated to both the professional sport and tennis lifestyle, will carry 77 hours of live French Open coverage during its fourth year in Paris, not including same-day repeats of the men’s and women’s singles semifinals. As a general rule, seven hours of live match play will air each day, from 5 a.m. to noon ET, with coverage continuing through the men’s and women’s quarterfinals deep into the second week of play (see complete schedule below).

The network’s groundbreaking prime-time show, French Open Tonight, will return each evening with anchor Bill Macatee and Tennis Channel’s signature set overlooking the tournament’s famed Musketeer Plaza. The nightly three-and-a-half-hour show will again offer interviews, highlights, analysis, encore match replays and coverage from in and around the City of Light. Macatee will host a variety of tennis personalities, including players, coaches, agents, tennis-industry representatives, past champions, Hall of Famers and other notables in the sport.

French Open Tonight will run from 6:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET, each evening, and immediately re-air twice in its entirety, throughout the night and early morning, concluding with the start of the following day’s live match play at 5 a.m. ET. In all, Tennis Channel will show more than 140 hours of the nightly show, with 42 hours of first-run airings.

All of Tennis Channel’s coverage from the world’s most prestigious clay-court competition will be produced in high definition. The network is working with ESPN2 again to bring viewers an almost round-the-clock tournament experience for the fourth consecutive year, with each channel cross-promoting the other’s schedule. As Tennis Channel’s daily match coverage concludes at noon ET, ESPN2 picks up the action without missing a beat, covering the tournament through 6:30 p.m. ET, when Tennis Channel’s French Open Tonight begins. Tennis Channel will produce all coverage for both channels, with each making use of its own on-air team.

On-Air Talent

John McEnroe and Martina Navratilova have become fixtures of Tennis Channel’s French Open coverage and will be back in the network’s booth this year as lead on-air analysts. In their fourth year of providing Hall of Fame insight, the pair will be joined by new correspondent Lindsay Davenport, a three-time Grand Slam singles winner who reached the French Open semifinals in 1998. Ted Robinson, Ian Eagle and former player Leif Shiras will resume play-by-play duties for the network in 2010, working with Tennis Channel’s long-running team of analysts and former players Katrina Adams, Justin Gimelstob, Barry MacKay and Corina Morariu.

“I’m thrilled that it’s springtime in Paris and the French Open is here again,” said Navratilova. “Everyone wants to see if Rafael Nadal can return to dominance after his disappointing exit last year. The women’s side is just as interesting, with so many potential winners. I can’t wait to get back in the Tennis Channel booth and watch it all unfold.”

Davenport, in addition to her appearances during match coverage, will frequently assist on French Open Tonight with Macatee, along with a roster of new contributors. Legendary tennis writer, analyst, reporter and all-around expert Bud Collins joins the prime-time team this year, as does long-time tennis journalist Jon Wertheim. Rounding out French Open Tonight will be Cari Champion, anchor of Tennis Channel’s Court Report nightly newscast, and Danielle Dotzenrod, host of health and nutrition series Fit To Hit. Combined, this group will offer analysis and commentary, and cover the sights and sounds of the tournament grounds, its fans and various on-site activities — with field reports from the surrounding city sprinkled into the mix.

Broadband Coverage

Tennis Channel’s extensive French Open coverage has never been limited to television. The network will again offer free live and on-demand broadband streams, with close to 125 matches and 200 hours during the first 10 days of the tournament. Visitors to the network’s site, tennischannel.com, will be able to view any one of five courts for the first eight days of the event, followed by a single court on days nine and ten. The site will also offer interview archives from French Open Tonight, news, live scores, daily highlights, exclusive tournament photos, blogs, columns, sweepstakes information and the network’s “Racquet Bracket” tournament prediction game.

Tennis Channel’s Live 2010 French Open Match Schedule — Entirely in High Definition

(Men’s/Women’s Singles Unless Otherwise Specified)

Date Time (ET) Event Sunday, May 23 5 a.m.-Noon First-Round Action Monday, May 24 5 a.m.-3 p.m. First-Round Action Tuesday, May 25 5 a.m.-Noon First-Round Action Wednesday, May 26 5 a.m.-Noon Second-Round Action Thursday, May 27 5 a.m.-Noon Second-Round Action Friday, May 28 5 a.m.-Noon Third-Round Action Saturday, May 29 5 a.m.-Noon Third-Round Action Sunday, May 30 5 a.m.-Noon Round of 16 Action Monday, May 31 5 a.m.-Noon Round of 16 Action Tuesday, June 1 8 a.m.-Noon Quarterfinals Wednesday, June 2 8 a.m.-Noon Quarterfinals Thursday, June 3 5 a.m.-8 a.m. Men’s Doubles Semifinals Tennis Channel will also offer same-day replays of the men’s and women’s singles semifinals:

Thursday, June 3 — 1 p.m.-6:30 p.m. (ET): women’s singles semifinals

Friday, June 4 — 5 p.m.-midnight (ET): men’s semifinals

Tennis Channel’s French Open Tonight Schedule

French Open Tonight airs Sunday, May 23-Thursday, June 3, and typically runs from 6:30 p.m.-10 p.m. ET, and is then repeated twice from 10 p.m.-1:30 a.m. and 1:30 a.m.-5 a.m. The following exceptions are ET:

Monday, May 24; Saturday, May 29; and Sunday, May 30 — 3 p.m.-6:30 p.m., followed by 6:30 p.m.-10 p.m., 10 p.m.-1:30 a.m. and 1:30 a.m.-5 a.m.

Additionally, shortened encore editions of French Open Tonight will air Tuesday, June 1, and Wednesday, June 2, from 5 a.m.-8 a.m.

The second semifinal, between Italy and Czech Republic to be played at the Foro Italico in Rome, features:

ITALY
Flavia Pennetta
Francesca Schiavone
Sara Errani
Roberta Vinci
Captain: Corrado Barazzutti
CZECH REPUBLIC
Lucie Safarova
Petra Kvitova
Lucie Hradecka
Kveta Peschke
Captain: Petr Pala
 
The World Group playoffs feature:
BELGIUM v ESTONIA
Venue: Grenslandhallen-Ethias Arena, Hasselt , BEL (clay – indoors)
Belgium
Kim Clijsters
Yanina Wickmayer
Justine Henin
Kirsten Flipkens
Captain: Sabine Appelmans
Estonia
Kaia Kanepi
Maret Ani
Margit Ruutel
Anett Schutting
Captain: Rene Busch

UKRAINE v AUSTRALIA
Venue: Palace of Sports "Lokomotiv", Kharkiv, UKR (clay – indoors)
Ukraine
Alona Bondarenko
Mariya Koryttseva
Lyudmyla Kichenok
Nadiya Kichenok
Captain: Volodymyr Bogdanov
Australia
Samantha Stosur
Alicia Molik
Anastasia Rodionova
Rennae Stubbs
Captain: David Taylor

GERMANY v FRANCE
Venue: Frankfurter TC 1914 Palmengarten, Frankfurt , GER (clay – outdoors)
Germany
Sabine Lisicki
Andrea Petkovic
Julia Goerges
Tatjana Malek
Captain: Barbara Rittner
France
Julie Coin
Alize Cornet
Pauline Parmentier
Aravane Rezai
Captain: Nicolas Escude

SERBIA v SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Venue: Belgrade Arena, Belgrade , SRB (clay – indoors)
Serbia
Jelena Jankovic
Bojana Jovanovski
Ana Jovanovic
Aleksandra Krunic
Captain: Dejan Vranes
Slovak Republic
Daniela Hantuchova
Dominika Cibulkova
Magdalena Rybarikova
Lenka Wienerova
Captain: Matej Liptak

 

The USTA announced Mary Carillo has been named President of USTA Serves – Foundation for Academics. Character. Excellence., the philanthropic and charitable entity of the USTA.  In this role, Carillo will serve as the principle spokesperson for the 16-year-old Foundation and will augment its mission of changing lives through tennis and education.

USTA Serves has disbursed over $10 million to fund hundreds of programs in more than 120 cities in 39 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. More than 150,000 children have received tennis, education, and health and wellness support, including more than 16 million hours of mentoring, tutoring and nutrition guidance. In addition, the Foundation has awarded more than 400 scholarships to college-bound students.

Carillo will assume the role previously held by Patrick McEnroe. Prior to being named President of the Foundation, Carillo was elected to the USTA Serves Board of Directors, and since 2003 she also has served on the USTA Serves Professional Player Advisory Council.   

MEN

Soft Parameter
As you may recall, the ATP revised its points table at the start of 2009, reducing the values for results less than titles.

It might be worth explaining how a points table is computed for a single-elimination event. And, to do that, it might be clearest to examine the two extreme cases.

At a single-elimination tournament, you eliminate half the players in each round. That, theoretically, means that in each round you knock out the weakest half of the players. That, it could be argued, means that each opponent is twice as difficult as the round before. So each win should be worth twice as much as the round before. So if a win is worth 1000 (as it is at Miami), then a final should be worth 500, a semifinal 250, a quarterfinal 125, etc.

This can actually be expressed as a number, a ratio between rounds. The author calls the actual points table an approximation to a "base curve" -- there is a formula (technically a geometric series) which the points awards roughly follow. But it's only a rough approximation because the numbers generally get rounded off slightly and so don't exactly follow the curve. Hence "base curve" for the formula to which the points table approximates. A base curve has a parameter, a number by which you multiply the point value for a particular round to get the value for the previous round. In the case above, the base curve parameter is 0.5.

At the opposite extreme is the situation in which you regard all wins as equal -- you assume that it's just as easy to beat #1 in the final as to beat #80 in the first round. Since there are seven rounds at Miami, that would mean that if a title is worth 1000, then a final is worth 857.(1000 minus 143, which is 1/7 of 1000). A semifinal is worth 714.(857 minus 143). And so forth. The base curve parameter in this case is effectively 1.0.

These are the extremes. Any reasonable points table .will have a base curve parameter somewhere between 0.5 and 1.0.

So where do the Tours stand? Recall that the current ATP points table for a 1000 point event like Miami is as follows:

Title: 1000
Final: 600 (ratio to preceding: 0.6)
Semifinal: 360 (ratio to the preceding: 0.6)
Quarterfinal: 180 (ratio to the preceding: 0.5)
Round of 16: 90 (ratio to the preceding: 0.5)
Round of 32: 45 (ratio to the preceding: 0.5)

As we said, the numbers in the actual point table don't quite fit an exact curve. It turns out that the base curve parameter for the ATP is roughly 0.57. If it were exactly .57, the points table would look like this:

Title: 1000
Final: 570
Semifinal: 325
Quarterfinal: 185
Round of 16: 106
Round of 32: 60

Now let's look at the WTA numbers:

:Title: 1000
Final: 700 (ratio to the preceding: 0.7)
Semifinal: 450 (ratio to the preceding: 0.64)
Quarterfinal: 250 (ratio to the preceding: 0.56)
Round of Sixteen: 140 (ratio to the preceding: 0.56)
Round of 32: 80 (ratio to the preceding: 0.57)

Again, we don't have a perfect curve. But the average parameter is about .64. If we took that as the parameter, we would get:

Title: 1000
Final: 640
Semifinal: 410
Quarterfinal: 262
Round of 16: 168
Round of 32: 107

So which is "right"? That is, which curve best represents the difficulty of winning in a particular round? There is no exact answer (unless you can tell us just how much harder it is to beat Roger Federer than Michael Berrer, anyway). But it's worth noting how big a difference this makes. At Miami, both the ATP and WTA have 96 players earning main draw points. But if we assume all seeds win their opening matches, and ignore qualifying points, then the WTA will hand out 8880 points at Miami. The ATP will hand out only 6000. That's a big differrence -- much bigger than the difference in the base curve parameter. This is the power of geometric progression. (Another illustration of that is shown by taking the point awards for the earlier rounds. In the final, the WTA awards 117% of what the ATP awards. But in the Round of 32, the WTA awards 178% percent of what the ATP awards!)

It is frankly hard to believe that #1 Roger Federer is twice as good as #2 Novak Djokovic, and that Djokovic is twice as good as #4 Rafael Nadal, and that Nadal is twice as good as #8 Andy Roddick (meaning, e.g., that Federer is four times as good as Nadal, and eight times as good as Roddick). Indeed, it's hard to believe that Federer is 1.75 times as good as Djokovic, which is the curve parameter of .57 implies. If Federer were that good, he would never lose. So a base curve parameter of 0.5 is absurd. A parameter of 1.0 is also absurd -- Federer may not be eight times as good as Roddick, but he is surely somewhat better. The author's feeling is that the parameter should be about 0.7. The WTA is a little below that. The ATP is far below that. The effects of that will probably eventually be measured in the volatility of the rankings. Unfortunately, we can't test that yet -- 2009 was a transition year, so it's no test. We won't be able to do a true test until the end of 2010.

***

WOMEN

The Real #2
This week, Caroline Wozniacki passed Dinara Safina to become the #2-ranked female tennis player. This prompted two questions: "Does she deserve it?" and "Who else is there?"

The answer to the first question is surely, "It depends on what you mean." We thought, for purposes of comparison, that we'd take a small sample of year-end #2 players and see what they had at the time. We decided to take a four-year increment. So we took the year-end #2 for 2006, 2002, 1998, and 1994.

2006 #2: Maria Sharapova. Her accomplishments: U. S. Open win, Australian Open and Wimbledon semifinals; 20-3 Slam record; 5 titles (Indian Wells, San Diego, U. S. Open, Zurich, Linz).

2002 #2: Venus Williams. Her accomplishments: finals at Roland Garros, Wimbledon, U. S. Open; 22-4 Slam record; 7 titles (Gold Coast, Paris Indoor, Antwerp, Amelia Island, Stanford, San Diego, New Haven).

1998 #2: Martina Hingis. Her accomplishments: Australian Open win; semifinals at other three Slams; 22-3 Slam record; 5 titles (Australian Open, Indian Wells, Hamburg, Rome, year-end Championships) [also won the doubles Grand Slam].

1994 #2: Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario. Her accomplishments: Roland Garros and U. S. Open wins, final at Australian Open; 23-2 Slam record; 8 titles (Amelia Island, Barcelona, Hamburg, Roland Garros, Canadian Open, U. S. Open, Princess Cup, Oakland)

We didn't stack this; we just decided that 15 years and four #2s was as much as we wanted to research, and that's what came out. To that we compare Wozniacki's results in the year up to and including Indian Wells 2010:

Wozniacki's accomplishments: U. S. Open final, 14-4 Slam record, 3 titles (Ponte Vedra Beach, Eastbourne, New Haven)

Thus Wozniacki has fewer titles than any #2 player we checked, and worse Slam results. Historically, it's pretty clear that Wozniacki stands below the "typical" #2 players.

Of course, she might improve on that. In any case, we aren't looking for the all-time #2 player. We're looking for the #2 player right now. This is why we ask the second question, "Who else is there?" That is, is there anyone who has a better right to the #2 ranking?

For this, of course, we don't want to use the WTA rankings, which should be called the "Player Punishment System," not "the rankings." A ranking system should be designed to determine who is the best player -- and Wozniacki is not ranked #2 because she is the second-best player, she is #2 because she is a top player (we aren't denying that) who happens to be healthy enough to play all the time. When you consider that Serena Williams, Dinara Safina, and Maria Sharapova have all missed significant time to injury, and Kim Clijsters has only been un-retired for half a year, and Justine Henin for only three months (and already has missed an event due to injury), it's clear that Wozniacki's biggest asset in the WTA rankings is her stamina.

To put this in perspective: Wozniacki now has 24 events (actual events, not nominal WTA events). Of the other players in the Top Ten, Agnieszka Radwanska has 22. Jelena Jankovic has 21. Dementieva and Stosur have 20. The other five have 19 or fewer events. Thus, additive rankings being additive rankings, Wozniacki has a big advantage just from how much she has played.

So we decided to take fourteen players who are reasonable candidates for #2 (the WTA's top 11, plus Clijsters, Sharapova, and Henin), and rank them under some alternate systems. In each of these categories, we will list the top five of our players, and plus Wozniacki if she is not Top Five.

Winning Percentage

Just what it sounds like: Percentage of matches won.

1. Clijsters........81%
2. Williams, S......80%
3. Henin............79%
4. Sharapova........77%
5. Safina...........77%
7. Wozniacki........73%

Even allowing that three of our top five have played limited schedules, we note that Wozniacki is only #4 among players who have played a whole year.

Winning Percentage, .Minimum 16 Events

To deal with all those players who haven't played enough, we require 16 events -- and add losses until they have 16.

1. Safina...........74%
2. Dementieva.......74%
3. Wozniacki........73%
4. Williams, S......73%
5. Williams, V......72%

This will be the best result Wozniacki produces under any system we could come up with on short notice. But note that she still isn't #2.

Winning Percentage, Premier Events

Lest the percentages above be biased by playing at small events, we calculate wins and losses based on taking only the Premier events (plus Slams and Championships)

1. Williams, S......81%
2. Clijsters........79%
3. Henin............78%
4. Safina...........75%
5. Sharapova........74%
7. Wozniacki........72%

No surprise to see Serena atop this one! But, again, Wozniacki is only #4 even among players who have played a full year.

Points Per Tournament

Just what it sounds like: Total WTA points earned (including those not counted toward a player's Best 16) divided by total actual events played in the last year.

1. Williams, S......618
2. Henin............550
3. Clijsters........409
4. Safina...........367
5. Williams, V......352
7. Wozniacki........291

Wozniacki really loves that #7 spot -- although, in this case, she isn't even #4 among players who have a full schedule; she turned out to be #5.

Points Per Tournament, Minimum 16 events

Same as above, but with a minimum divisor of 16 events. That is, if a player has fewer than 16 events, we divide her point total by 16 anyway..

1. Williams, S......540
2. Safina...........367
3. Williams, V......352
4. Kuznetsova.......330
5. Wozniacki........291

Note that Wozniacki is actually worse in points per tournament rankings than in won/lost. That probably says something about the tiers of the events she is playing.

Quality Points per Tournament

Our favorite for estimating future results. Based, of course, on the quality points the WTA no longer awards.

1. Henin............119
2. Williams, S......101
3. Clijsters.........99
4. Kuznetsova........66
5. Williams, V.......64
6. Azarenka..........61
7. Sharapova.........53
8. Safina............51
9. Wozniacki.........48

Wozniacki's worst result yet. This would seem to imply that she will fall before she can rise.

Modernized Divisor

The descendent of the pre-1997 divisor rankings, taking into account point inflation and the 16 event minimum. We take round points, add double quality points, and divide by 16 or the number of events, whichever is greater.

1. Williams, S......819
2. Williams, V......480
3. Safina...........468
4. Kuznetsova.......461
5. Azarenka.........413
6. Wozniacki........387

Well, at least Wozniacki isn't #7 in this one....

Declining Divisor

This is, in the author's opinion, the best ranking system we can make based just on points and events. We take total WTA round points, add four times the quality points (doubling once because of point inflation, then doubling again because quality points are a better measure of tournament strength than WTA tier), and use a minimum divisor of 16; for players with more than 16 events, we subtract a third of an event for each event past #16..

1. Williams, S......893
2. Kuznetsova.......615
3. Williams, V......609
4. Safina...........582
5. Azarenka.........546
6. Wozniacki........544

And so, to our shock and amazement, it appear that Svetlana Kuznetsova "ought" to be #2. At least until Miami. Certainly it doesn't appear that Wozniacki is the second-best player out there; she was not #2 in any system.

At least there isn't much doubt about who is #1. In every statistic, Serena Williams led the players who had played a full year. Often by a very wide margin (note her modernized divisor score, which is almost twice that of the #2 player. And her declining divisor score is more than 40% above the #2.)