View Full Version : An Overall Champion?

Jul 23rd, 2002, 04:24 AM
This isn't my idea. I stole it from somewhere, but I can't remember where. Possibly on Wertheim's Mailbag. The idea is to increase the exposure of doubles, and get more elite players to play.

Have an overall champ at the end of the year.

Singles points plus half of doubles points. Or something similar.

So if player A has 2000 singles points and 1000 doubles points, your overall score is 2500. But if player B has 1800 singles points and 2000 doubles points, they would have 2800. So player B is the tour champin that year, even though they aren't the singles champion.

Yes no maybe so?

Jul 23rd, 2002, 07:15 AM

Everyone complains that the players are supposedly overworked to where it affects their health. Most of the top 10 plays minimal doubles, should we cajole them into playing an even higher volume of competitive tennis?

Jul 23rd, 2002, 08:29 AM
Cant resist - Where would Graf have been with that system??

Jul 23rd, 2002, 08:39 AM
or monica!

Brian Stewart
Jul 23rd, 2002, 10:43 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing it. Gte a special sponsor for it, like they did with Hoover (the "Hoover Mover". Why did they cancel that before my fave was in line to win it?)

Maybe some "all-purpose" product could sponsor the "all-purpose" player. Give a monthly award to the player with the most singles and doubles points for that month.

Jul 23rd, 2002, 11:08 PM
Players are already getting injured a lot, so that will make it even worse because they would have to play more.

Also, that will give a very high overall ranking for someone like Lisa Raymond who doesn't do very well at singles. I just think that in SINGLES, it's the player's talent on his own and this is the most important ranking. But you add doubles, then it makes it less "real".

Jul 23rd, 2002, 11:14 PM
Yes. That would be fun - doubles is the part of the sport and demands some distinctive skills that some top singles players lack (Capriati, Seles, Pierce)..

Cant resist - Where would Graf have been with that system??

Exactly where she is - the best ever singles player, but nowhere near the best overall player, which is Navratilova.

Jul 23rd, 2002, 11:50 PM
Would that have kept Martina Hingis at no.1 for longer ?

Jul 24th, 2002, 12:41 AM

Jul 24th, 2002, 02:49 AM
Re Steffi and Monica - That's why the system is weighted in favor of singles players. It won't make the #20 singles player #1. But it could be the deciding factor between #1 and #2. Well no, not right now. The two players this really helps is Lindsay and Martina. They play the most doubles.

Venus and Serena can probably hold them off in just slam performances. If they win both singles and doubles in GS's. Monica and Martina might hook up again. Jenn would have to find a partner. Olga B could give her tip on .. uhh .. tension release.

Jul 24th, 2002, 03:32 PM
Nonsense, in my opinion.
Singles and doubles are different.
Different rules, approaches, let alone different courts.

It's like stating who's the best "runner" among Greene and Gebreselasie (spelling?)

Jul 24th, 2002, 04:44 PM
Theres no point of doing that system. If you will be able to be in the top ranking for singles and doubles simulataneously then you are the best.

AS FAR AS I KNOW, LINDSAY AND MARTINA were one of the FEW players who can managed to be number ONE in singles and doubles at the same time.

GO LINDSAY and Martina!!!!