PDA

View Full Version : Offical ranking Points for the Olympics HERE!!


VeeJJ
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:45 AM
I've seen a few threads come up for this so i decided just to post tehm. They are on the ITF site.

http://www.itftennis.com/olympics/history/athens/event/points.asp


The ITF is pleased to confirm that, thanks to the co-operation of the ATP and WTA, the Tennis Event at the 2008 Olympics will carry ranking points for both men and women.

The points will be awarded as follows:

Men's ATP ranking points

Gold Medal - 400
Silver Medal - 280
Bronze Medal - 205
Loser 3rd/4th - 155
Quarterfinals - 100
Round of 16 - 50
Round of 32 - 25
1st Round - 5

Women's WTA ranking points

Gold Medal - 353
Silver Medal - 245
Bronze Medal - 175
Loser 3rd/4th - 135
Quarterfinals - 90
Round of 16 - 48
Round of 32 - 28
1st Round - 1

mckyle.
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:50 AM
How did they do it? More than a Tier II but less than a Tier I?

Craig.
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:52 AM
How did they do it? More than a Tier II but less than a Tier I?

Yeah. Now ain't that retarded? I mean, I know it's only once in 4 years, but I'd like to think that an Olympic medal is worth more than a Tier 1 title.

Uranium
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:52 AM
How did they do it? More than a Tier II but less than a Tier I?

The question I would ask would be what is with that random # of 353 for the gold medalist?:lol:

Craig.
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:53 AM
The question I would ask would be what is with that random # of 353 for the gold medalist?:lol:

I know, right?! :lol: That is just weird.

DimaDinosaur
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:54 AM
but why wouldn't you post this in those threads instead of creating a new thread spamming up GM:weirdo:

your response to this thread is :weirdo: :rolleyes:

Uranium
Jul 8th, 2008, 04:58 AM
your response to this thread is :weirdo: :rolleyes:

no, he says he saw the threads asking for the Olympic points, but instead of posting them in those threads he created a new thread, which is taking up space in GM, aka Spam:o

danieln1
Jul 8th, 2008, 05:06 AM
Ridiculous amount of points, should be just like Miami or YEC at least...

mckyle.
Jul 8th, 2008, 05:44 AM
So it looks like they did lowest Tier I points (430) + lowest Tier II points (275) and then divided. 430+275=705/2=352.5

ASP0315
Jul 8th, 2008, 05:49 AM
Olympic ranking sytem sucks.
They should award the same number points as a GS event.
353 points is very low for a major event which takes place every 4 years.

Uranium
Jul 8th, 2008, 05:54 AM
Olympic ranking sytem sucks.
They should award the same number points as a GS event.
353 points is very low for a major event which takes place every 4 years.

you can't make the points that much, because if you win it, you can't defend it next year and would then lose a lot of points because of the 4 year rule.

Sharapowerr
Jul 8th, 2008, 06:07 AM
So if you win the gold medal, the points will count ( stay ) for 4 yrs.?

Zoeki
Jul 8th, 2008, 06:19 AM
WOW!It's still much more than most of we chinese thought.
We discussed it last year,most of us thought it would be less than a Tier II points given that it is the first time.Maybe 280 or less.


But……

So it looks like they did lowest Tier I points (430) + lowest Tier II points (275) and then divided. 430+275=705/2=352.5

what a joke?!:help:
is it a three years old boy who made the decision?

Jeff
Jul 8th, 2008, 06:33 AM
you can't make the points that much, because if you win it, you can't defend it next year and would then lose a lot of points because of the 4 year rule.

Good point.

Malva
Jul 8th, 2008, 07:04 AM
you can't make the points that much, because if you win it, you can't defend it next year and would then lose a lot of points because of the 4 year rule.

Sure, but you can look at it differently: winning Olympics is a one time boost to the winner's ranking.

So I don't think this is particularly relevant.

Perhaps the fact that Olympics points are not available to all players which contradicts the spirit of open competitions, is more important.

This is due to the fact that participation in the Olympics is ruled by the principle of representing a particular country, so, for example, some very good Russian players would not be able to compete because they didn't qualify for the national Olympics team.

Lindsayfan32
Jul 8th, 2008, 07:45 AM
How did they do it? More than a Tier II but less than a Tier I?

There shouldn't be raking points for the olympics. This is one event players should want to play for the glory of representing your country. The ranking points are the reason that so many of the top players are going to complete

Dawson.
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:03 PM
it should be more points than a tier 1! i mean, its the fecking olympics!!!

i thought they would give around 500 points to the winner

A'DAM
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:33 PM
They cant give to much points cause it would not be fair to player that cant participate!!!
For example many very good russian player will not have a chance to play!!!

RND
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:40 PM
I think it looks just good to me. :)

You have to take into account that,firstly,some high-ranked players COULDN'T play,secondly,if they give out too much,there will be troubles the NEXT year when points are taken off.

In The Zone
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:45 PM
Because there is a tour event the same week, (Cincinnati), I feel that it is okay to offer ranking points. Since every individual tournament is not a factor into the ranking, but only if it is part of your Best 12 (outside of the 5 mandatories), the Olympics can offer ranking points. People play tournaments all the time that don't factor into their ranking because they play more than 17 events. Jankovic, anyone?

It gives it that extra punch and fire that it needs. For the lower ranked players with no chance of medalling, they show up for the ranking points. But for the stars who have a shot at medalling, they could care less about the ranking points.

thrust
Jul 8th, 2008, 02:47 PM
Olympic ranking sytem sucks.
They should award the same number points as a GS event.
353 points is very low for a major event which takes place every 4 years.

353 points? Only the WTA could come up with such a stupid number! It should be between a tier 1 and Slam, and the points should not be taken away till the next Olympics. Why take away something that cannot be defended?

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 8th, 2008, 05:08 PM
353 points? Only the WTA could come up with such a stupid number! It should be between a tier 1 and Slam, and the points should not be taken away till the next Olympics. Why take away something that cannot be defended?

:bounce:
Myskina would've had 550 points and been Top-60 forever since she is the last ever winner of Tier II Bahia and Leipzig and hasn't officially retired.