It is not so early. We still count the number of correct picks then the number of correct SR's before this stage.
Why do we have to focus only on the winners when deciding who wins in TT. Lets take two secenario's from the 2009 US Open R3:-
Oudin vs Sharapova (Result : Oudin 36 64 75)
Clijsters vs Flipkens (Result : Clijsters 60 62)
Player A picks:-
Player B picks:-
Who picked the closest in these two matches? Yes Player A because he/she took a risk and gave a set to Oudin, but he/she will get no reward for this pick with the current rule.
For all you who have voted Option 1 then you don't believe that Player A should be rewarded for giving a set to Oudin if the TT match was tied on scores and correct SR's. No you would rather look back through matches where you had picked the winner to decide the SR Shootout or TB (you have already been credited for these winning matches in the scores and maybe in the correct SR's count).
The rule in Option 1 is STOPPING players from taking risks by picking 2-1 set scores (lots of players will only ever pick 64 63 and 2-0 scores) and it is NOT rewarding the player who has predicted the closest in ALL the matches, which has got to be much more fairer.
Frank asked players to post why they voted for option 1. The only response back has said that we should only focus on winning picks and that the other option is too complicated. If this is the best you can come up with.