2003 Tennis Masters Cup – Singles

Lleyton Hewitt was the defending champion but did not qualify this year.

Singles
2003 Tennis Masters Cup
Champion Roger Federer
Runner-up Andre Agassi
Final score6–3, 6–0, 6–4

Roger Federer won in the final 6–3, 6–0, 6–4 against Andre Agassi.

Seeds

A champion seed is indicated in bold text while text in italics indicates the round in which that seed was eliminated.

  1. Andy Roddick (Semifinals)
  2. Juan Carlos Ferrero (Round Robin)
  3. Roger Federer (Champion)
  4. Guillermo Coria (Round Robin)
  5. Andre Agassi (Final)
  6. Rainer Schüttler (Semifinals)
  7. Carlos Moyá (Round Robin)
  8. David Nalbandian (Round Robin)

Draw

Key

Finals
Semifinals Final
            
6 Rainer Schüttler 7 0 4
5 Andre Agassi 5 6 6
5 Andre Agassi 3 0 4
3 Roger Federer 6 6 6
3 Roger Federer 77 6
1 Andy Roddick 62 2

Red Group
Roddick Coria Schüttler Moyá RR W–L Set W–L Game W–L Standings
1 Andy Roddick 6–3, 6–7(3–7), 6–3 6–4, 6–7(4–7), 6–7(3–7) 6–2, 3–6, 6–3 2–1 5–4 51–42 2
4 Guillermo Coria 3–6, 7–6(7–3), 3–6 3–6, 6–4, 2–6 6–2, 6–3 1–2 4–4 36–39 3
6 Rainer Schüttler 4–6, 7–6(7–4), 7–6(7–3) 6–3, 4–6, 6–2 5–7, 4–6 2–1 4–4 43–42 1
7 Carlos Moyá 2–6, 6–3, 3–6 2–6, 3–6 7–5, 6–4 1–2 3–4 29–36 4

Standings are determined by: 1) Number of wins; 2) Number of matches; 3) In two-players-ties, head-to-head records; 4) In three-players-ties, percentage of sets won, or of games won; 5) Steering Committee decision.

Blue Group
Ferrero Federer Agassi Nalbandian RR W–L Set W–L Game W–L Standings
2 Juan Carlos Ferrero 3–6, 1–6 6–2, 3–6, 4–6 3–6, 1–6 0–3 1–6 21–38 4
3 Roger Federer 6–3, 6–1 6–7(3–7), 6–3, 7–6(9–7) 6–3, 6–0 3–0 6–1 43–23 1
5 Andre Agassi 2–6, 6–3, 6–4 7–6(7–3), 3–6, 6–7(7–9) 7–6(12–10), 3–6, 6–4 2–1 5–4 46–48 2
8 David Nalbandian 6–3, 6–1 3–6, 0–6 6–7(10–12), 6–3, 4–6 1–2 3–4 31–32 3

Standings are determined by: 1) Number of wins; 2) Number of matches; 3) In two-players-ties, head-to-head records; 4) In three-players-ties, percentage of sets won, or of games won; 5) Steering Committee decision.

gollark: > sqlite is not less complex than this formatYes. *But*, you don't actually have to interact with the SQLite disk format directly because libsqlite3 exists.
gollark: I suspect SQLite would lose out somewhat in storage efficiency, but it could plausibly be faster for many things at runtime.
gollark: It's less complex for everyone interacting with it, since they can just... use SQLite, which has bindings for everything, instead of "zimlib". And by "efficiency" do you mean "space efficiency" or "lookup efficiency"? Because, as I said, SQLite would probably only add a few bytes per directory entry row, which is not a significant increase.
gollark: SQLite's overhead is pretty low, and the majority of the filesize is from the binary blobs which would remain the same in each.
gollark: It's less complex for them as the code is already there and written with a nice API, and "less efficient" how? Slightly more space on headers?

See also
  • ATP World Tour Finals appearances
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.