PDA

View Full Version : YEC Format


liuxuan
Oct 27th, 2005, 06:49 PM
I really dont get it! I mean, i do understand it but this round robin business seems a little unfair.

In the first group last year, Linzi and Serena bothwon 2 and lost 1. Linzi beat Serena, yet it was Serena who went through because her set score was 5-3 compared with 4-3, only because she won a set in her loss to myskina, while linzi got beaten in straight sets. I think thats really unfair as if theres 2 people who won 2 lost 1, it should be who won between them which should be the decider, dont you think?

Also, could someone explain if the system prevents bribing? for instance, if dementieva had lost both her matches last year already when she came to play serena, and knew she didnt have a chance of making it thru, she could have let serena win in straight sets so that she would go through. Sure, its unlikely that this carry on would happen, but if its 2 friends playing, you never know.

Bubba08
Oct 27th, 2005, 06:55 PM
Serena looses in 3 sets against lindsay and she beats Nastya in 3 sets, not the contrary ;)

Andy T
Oct 27th, 2005, 07:08 PM
Four groups of three with only the winner qualifying for the semis is the best way to ensure the noone throws a match.

suzie
Oct 27th, 2005, 07:13 PM
Also, could someone explain if the system prevents bribing? for instance, if dementieva had lost both her matches last year already when she came to play serena, and knew she didnt have a chance of making it thru, she could have let serena win in straight sets so that she would go through. Sure, its unlikely that this carry on would happen, but if its 2 friends playing, you never know.
In YEC 2003, Elena lost both her matches against Kim and Amélie but came back from a set and a break down to defeat Chanda. The pratical consequences were that Elena won the match (even if it didn't allow her to qualify to semis) and Amélie went throught to meet Justine. They're professional players, I don't think any of them would give a match away to "help" a friend. ;)

alwayshingis
Oct 27th, 2005, 07:19 PM
Four groups of three with only the winner qualifying for the semis is the best way to ensure the noone throws a match.

Then either players have to play out of their groups, which means they won't be judged against the same opponents, or they only play two matches which seems a little low to me.

TomTennis
Oct 27th, 2005, 09:12 PM
I really dont get it! I mean, i do understand it but this round robin business seems a little unfair.

In the first group last year, Linzi and Serena bothwon 2 and lost 1. Linzi beat Serena, yet it was Serena who went through because her set score was 5-3 compared with 4-3, only because she won a set in her loss to myskina, while linzi got beaten in straight sets. I think thats really unfair as if theres 2 people who won 2 lost 1, it should be who won between them which should be the decider, dont you think?

Also, could someone explain if the system prevents bribing? for instance, if dementieva had lost both her matches last year already when she came to play serena, and knew she didnt have a chance of making it thru, she could have let serena win in straight sets so that she would go through. Sure, its unlikely that this carry on would happen, but if its 2 friends playing, you never know.

the first comment you are totally wrong. Yes it would appear that just because Lindsay beat Serena she should go through, but Serena beat Myskina, yet Lindsay didnt, so they were stuck in a three way triangle. (all 3 beat dementieva so ill leave her out.
Lindsay beat Serena
Serena beat Myskina
Myskina beat Lindsay

therefore NO it would not be fair just for Lindsay to go over Serena seen as though she won THERE match, because that could be said for Lindsay and Myskina! Myskina and Serena both performed better in their losses (both lost in 3 sets) compared to Lindsay (who lost in 2), so therefore she came in a 3rd. I think that is totally fair! and really dont see what you are getting at!

The second comment though, i guess there is no one stopping that, but i very much doubt that would happen, even if, i.e. Serena needed to lose in order for Venus to advance, i still dont see it happening.

Andy T
Oct 27th, 2005, 09:25 PM
Then either players have to play out of their groups, which means they won't be judged against the same opponents, or they only play two matches which seems a little low to me.

To take a fictitious example, you have 12 qualifiers for the finals.
1-4 Sharapova-Clijsters-Davenport-Pierce
5-8 Henin-Venus-Mauresmo-Dementieva
9-12 Schnyder-Serena-Petrova-Myskina

Pool A: Sharapova-Henin-Schnyder
Pool B Clijsters-Mauresmo-Petrova
Pool C Davenport-Venus-Myskina
Pool D Pierce-Dementieva-Serena

Pool A
Sharapova vs Henin: Sharapova in 3s
Henin vs Schnyder - Henin must win to stay in. If Schnyder wins in 2s she goes top, in three she is equal with Sharapova. Both women have a stake. Let's say Henin wins in 2.
Schnyder vs Sharapova If Sharapova wins, she qualifies. If she loses in 3, she qualifies. If Masha loses in 2, Schnyder and Henin finish equal, 3 sets to 2 with Masha 2-3. At this point, the rules could say that the winner of the direct encounter qualifies OR that the best games won-lost differential qualifies. In case one, it's Henin, in case 2 it depends on the games tally.

With each group producing a semi-finalist, there'd be semis and a final. The winner would have to play 4 matches.

Spunky83
Oct 27th, 2005, 09:30 PM
Four groups of three with only the winner qualifying for the semis is the best way to ensure the noone throws a match.

In that case I wouldn´t even try to bother spending an extra month preparing and everything :lol:

Although I´ve gotta say it´s pretty weird when two players meet each other again in the finals.

Sir Stefwhit
Oct 27th, 2005, 09:30 PM
It's totally fair, and it's by far the best format for the Championships. It's the best move the WTA has done in a long time!

TomTennis
Oct 27th, 2005, 10:00 PM
It's totally fair, and it's by far the best format for the Championships. It's the best move the WTA has done in a long time!

i think so too, but i think they should have left it in Madison Square Garden.

i know its easy to say that now, and back then i bet 99% of people would have thought, 'oh yeh, y not change it and take it to LA for a bit, i bet there is a big crowd there'.

but it has REALLY hurt the tour championships!