Every day the situation of the tennis calendar seems to be changing. The various hypotheses of summer and post-summer programming follow one another at exorbitant speeds.
Just 24 hours ago I wrote a long and detailed article on the situation of the US Open which affects the whole calendar to come, on the possible effects on Madrid and Rome if in New York you had to play regularly (more or less …) ‘US Open.
In fact, some news emerged that seem to change certain sceneries, even for Madrid and Rome whose prize money and draws would be significantly reduced (40 or 50% less prize money for draw limited to 48 tennis players, with 16 byes) and whose finals would not be played on Sunday, but on Tuesday with some rules imposed on the various tournaments to protect the television coverage of the same finals.
Moreover, even virologists seem to emit new pronouncements every day, often contradicting each other and even themselves. The tennis world can’t be an exception.
Meanwhile, a different optimism seems to have leaked – as they say – as if the sensations of a progressively less lethal coronavirus had spread globally (as has almost always happened with the arrival of summer).
I indicated that in the United States the will to give rise to the US Open was strongly characterized and confirmed by what the CEO of the USTA Stacey Allaster said despite a cautious premise “We have not taken any decision, but everything is … fluid”.
Allaster, in an interview granted telephonically to the Associated Press, however, makes it clear that in case that it is decided by June 15th (this seems to be the deadline for everyone) to confirm the dispute of the US Open, the USTA already knows how this thing will go.
In summary charter flights are planned to transport players with small teams and only from certain airports (Rome and Milan are not among them …), COVID-19 test before start of the trip, daily temperature checks at the National Tennis Center in Flushing Meadows. Discarded imaginative Indian Wells-like hypotheses, etc. Doors closed to the public. Few officials, locker rooms closed on training days.
But I’m going back to Madrid and Rome. The deadline for all decisions appears to have been set for June 15th. If the virus had given us truce in Europe and not in New York there would be no problems either for Madrid or for Rome. Madrid could take place shortly after early September, Rome soon after.
Otherwise the last idea is to extend the duration of Madrid, which could begin in the first days of the week from September 14th to 20th, but end on Tuesday 22nd. This would allow, with a billboard of 48 tennis players and 16 byes, to wait for any New York finalists for several more days. Theoretically, they could take the field for their first round (second of the tournament) on Thursday 17th or even Friday 18th. There would be five days to carry on the tournament (which has three retractable roofs in case of rain), from Friday to Tuesday .
At the same time, the Internazionali d’Italia could have run smoothly, starting on Monday 21st or Tuesday 22nd September, but to protect Madrid’s TV rights, on the day of the Castilian final (Tuesday 22nd) Rome for one day should not be able to show his games on TV. Or maybe it could be held to a television black-out only for those games simultaneously with the Madrid final (last year in Madrid the women’s final was played on Saturday, the day before compared to the male one, while Rome made them play on the same day).
The finals of Rome should take place on Monday 28th September, simultaneously with the second day of Roland Garros. For Italy there should be no problems of television conflicts: the Masters 1000 are broadcasted by Sky, the Roland Garros by Eurosport.
Paris and Rome, French Federtennis and ATP with Federtennis Italiana should almost certainly find an agreement not to bother with TV rights problems. It is an emergency situation, and everyone should understand it. Players included: they are asked to give up a lot of prize money – a sacrifice that the organizers would like by 50%, perhaps they will agree on 40% or even 35% – but a solution must also be found for those players who would have entered the 56- or 64- player boards and now will be out of it. But in short, it seems that goodwill, even among conflicting interests, will end up prevailing.
Article translated from Italian by Tommaso Villa
