PDA

View Full Version : If WTA Tour used a ranking system based on averages: Safina #1, Serena #2, Venus #3


felipe2004
Jul 5th, 2009, 12:49 AM
If the WTA Tour used a system based on averages, Dinara Safina would still be #1, Serena #2 and Venus #3.

Calculations on the file attached.

Summary:

- Safina has 11011 points in 19 tournaments: 579,53 per tournament

- Serena has 8759 points in 17 tournaments: 515,24 per tournament

- Venus has 6617 points in 16 tournaments: 413,56 per tournamet

Actually, two of Serena's 17 tournaments are zero-pointers no shows (Indian Wells, which is mandatoy, and Charleston, which she pulled out after the draw had been made). One of Venus's 16 tournaments is Indian Wells, which is mandatory.

If you discard the zero-pointer for Charleston (because it is not mandatory, which I think is fair), we have:

- Serena has 8759 points in 16 tournaments: 547,44 per tournament (still less than Safina);

If you also discard Indian Wells (which I think is NOT fair, since it is mandatory), we have:

- Serena has 8759 points in 15 tournaments: 583,93 per tournament

- Venus has 6617 points in 15 tournaments: 441,13 per tournamet

Only in this scenario, Serena wolud be #1, but only 4 points ahead of Safina.


One thing I think is bad about the average system is that it would heavily discorage the top players from playing International and even Premier tournaments. Safina or Serena, for example, would actually LOSE points for winning a Premier tournament (they would only get 470 points, which is less than their average).

Cakeisgood
Jul 5th, 2009, 12:56 AM
I love you for actually contributing to this issue with data.

THERE. Serena is STILL #2.

RenaSlam.
Jul 5th, 2009, 12:58 AM
I love you for actually contributing to this issue with data.

THERE. Serena is STILL #2.

Well no wonder you're happy. :lol:

Horizon
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:00 AM
Taking out Indian Wells is fair, it's a no brainer that she won't play, everyone may as well just accept it, she didn't play so she can't be blamed for gaining 0 points.

Knizzle
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:03 AM
Ummm....using a divisor would still take into account a certain number of tournaments. The old divisor did your best 14. Nice try though.

Cakeisgood
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:07 AM
Well no wonder you're happy. :lol:

I don't dislike Serena. I do dislike Serena fans (and others) moaning about how she "deserves" and is the "real" Number 1.

Obviously, Ree is the best player right now. But I'm glad finally someone had the initiative to silence the people bitching about how the system must be changed.

Cakeisgood
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:08 AM
Taking out Indian Wells is fair, it's a no brainer that she won't play, everyone may as well just accept it, she didn't play so she can't be blamed for gaining 0 points.

No. She boycotts, she accepts the consequences.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:09 AM
In the last 14 days, Serena has achieved more than Safina has in her entire career.

Black Mamba.
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:14 AM
The ranking system is ok in my book. It would be nice to say the best player was also the number 1 player but it is what it is. IMO the top 5 is pretty interchangeable anyway because at the end of the day you're going to have to beat some pretty good players from the quarters on in order to win anything.

Horizon
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:19 AM
No. She boycotts, she accepts the consequences.
Yeh but it wasn't her actual tennis.

If the WTA ranking system was average based, then yeh, this would be the case, but if we let the actual tennis do the talking, it doesn't count, she didn't play.

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:39 AM
The best way, IMO, is to take the total points and divide it by the 14 best events....but included in that are the 4 Grand Slams and 5 Premier Mandatory events.....so Serena would get a 0 for Charleston and Indian Wells.

Can you calculate this?

Fingon
Jul 5th, 2009, 01:43 AM
the problem is, the average system is better than the current system but it's not a silver bullet, you have to fix other things as well.

You need quality points, and you need consistency in distributing the round points.

The current system rewards more points for winning a 1st round match in a gs than for winning a second round.

A tournament like Miami awards the same points as Beijing, but has one more round.

The system needs a complete overhaul, not just small fixes here and there. It has been screwed for a while but every time the wta makes a change it makes things worse.