PDA

View Full Version : Unfair Ranking DisAdvantage For Defending GS Champions


VeeDaQueen
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:02 AM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(

Junex
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:14 AM
Its normal because what really counts is the YE ranking and defending you GS points is a very good buffer...i guess...

and just like Justine, if she do well in other tournaments then she will have no other route but upwards in the rankings...

Crazy Canuck
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:27 AM
For the life of me, I will never understand why people think that a 52 week rolling ranking system is "unfair" because it doesn't carry over results that happened more than 52 weeks ago.

MH0861
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:53 AM
The 2006 result replaces the 2005, it makes sense that if they get the same amount of points for the event in each year, the player's rank points will stay the same. Do you think they should get some kind of "bonus" or something for defending a slam?

spencercarlos
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:55 AM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(
Since this ranking system has been instated this year, everyone defending a title form last year is suffering the same, itīs the same for everybody, i donīt see the unfair part.

Now if you tell me that its unfair that beating the world number one means the same as beating the world 200 (0 points), yeah i think thatīs unfair.

stevos
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:55 AM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(
You are retarded. How is that not fair? You give WS fans a bad name.

anlavalle
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:59 AM
I say is fair because if someone win all the slams of mostly (like roger in the atp) then she can be number one for a long time without playing and that is unfair, a real champion must be able of defend her (or his) titles (like Rogi)

bello
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:03 AM
When I was a kid tennis enthusiast i never got it...BUT...the rankings take into consideration 12 MONTHS of results....therefore u are ranked on your performance of the last 12 months....thats why points 'drop off'...imagine if points simply accumulated then old players would have an advantage....anyway it is common sense for it to work that way....if Venus wins wimbledon she retains her ranking becasue her current ranking already has points for a wimbledon win in it.

Aaron.
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:05 AM
This is how Serena Got from 13th to 53 after the AO

switz
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:09 AM
any sport with a continuous ranking system is the same - golf, sqaush etc if the rankings were just the total of all the points a player gained throughout their career Navratilova would still be number 1 in the world :lol:

darrinbaker00
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:25 AM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(
Don't blame the system; blame Venus for not playing enough events to take advantage of the system.

VeeDaQueen
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:41 AM
You are retarded. How is that not fair? You give WS fans a bad name.

okay, that was completely uncalled for and it completely showed your stupidity.

faboozadoo15
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:44 AM
:haha:

Kenny
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:46 AM
Yeah, I kinda don't like this thread. It just seems whenever something doesn't go Venus's way everyone seems to create a thread saying why.. it's so unfair.

Sorry, I'm Venus's top fan -- but the ranking system isn't unfair (in this aspect.)

Best of luck Vee--win it! :)

Marcus1979
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:50 AM
it allows em to maintain around their ranking and then in other events they can improve on their ranking IMO

Marcus1979
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:55 AM
just remember it was this scenario that allowed Venus to get to #1 in 2002 when Jennifer Capriati didn't gain any pts when she won Australian Open as she won it the year prior ;)

Gotta put things into perspective

VeeDaQueen
Jun 15th, 2006, 06:57 AM
who says that this was just a pity party for Venus, i was just point Venus out as an example. i don't think it's fair for any GS champion, because with bonus points, you can still gain a few points to help your ranking :)

Marcus1979
Jun 15th, 2006, 07:01 AM
technically they are gaining pts

if Venus were to not defend Wimbledon

she would get pts earned for how far she goes

and 700 pts from last year would come off

anyway she has plenty of time after WImbledon to gain pts

after Wimbledon this is what she is defending

Final at STanford
QF at US Open
QF at Beijing

Ballbasher
Jun 15th, 2006, 07:05 AM
Venus should just play more :shrug:

VeeDaQueen
Jun 15th, 2006, 07:18 AM
why is Venus being outed when I only used her as an example :(

Zauber
Jun 15th, 2006, 07:46 AM
you need to learn how the system works.
Its the same for everyone.
It is not unfair.
You can design various sytems.
However if you are not successful you will go down in your ranking whatever the system.
sour grapes
You should not have used her as an example.

Dexter
Jun 15th, 2006, 07:54 AM
wtf? :confused:

kovazh
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:12 AM
With the old system Venus could even loose points even when she defends her title. Because it would be still possible that she gets less Bonuspoints when she beats just lower ranked players then the year before. So what do you think? Which system is now the better? ;)

moby
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:16 AM
any sport with a continuous ranking system is the same - golf, sqaush etc if the rankings were just the total of all the points a player gained throughout their career Navratilova would still be number 1 in the world :lol:The thread should have ended with this post. I don't know why there's still anything left to debate?

KimC&MariaSNo1's
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:54 AM
Your a Moron and you really shouldnt use Venus as an example the question is stupid.

The_Pov
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:58 AM
:smash: dumbest thread of the year.

It's all part and parcel of defending your title.

Wojtek
Jun 15th, 2006, 11:05 AM
omg this thread :lol: :lol: :lol:

VeeDaQueen (http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?u=33759) can you take pills ok?

Shonami Slam
Jun 15th, 2006, 11:31 AM
i think winning a grand slam would be of more importance to venus (or mostly any other player on tour) than going up a few places in the ranks.
when you've been #1 once, you want to rack up history with chunks of metal-works.
you shouldn't be upset that she wins something but doesn't go up. you should be happy because she won again.

V-MAC
Jun 15th, 2006, 11:35 AM
I'll just take defending a slam thank you, doesn't matter about not gaining any extra points :shrug:

Aaron.
Jun 15th, 2006, 11:45 AM
omg this thread :lol: :lol: :lol:

VeeDaQueen (http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?u=33759) can you take pills ok? :lol: :lol:

Paneru
Jun 15th, 2006, 12:02 PM
who says that this was just a pity party for Venus, i was just point Venus out as an example. i don't think it's fair for any GS champion, because with bonus points, you can still gain a few points to help your ranking :)

Don't sweat it sweetie! :kiss:

Yes, it would be nice if they still did the bonus
points but they don't. Oh well. Yet, Venus could
stay ranked 12th or whatever and it wouldn't make
winning her 4th Wimbledon any less sweet! :cool:

The Crow
Jun 15th, 2006, 12:21 PM
With bonus points, you can even LOSE points when you defend a title...

Darop.
Jun 15th, 2006, 12:59 PM
OMG I can't believe I fell so low as to reading the first post of this thread :retard:

tennisIlove09
Jun 15th, 2006, 01:05 PM
In the posters defence, I think she was referring to the quality points players used to get for the rank of player you beat. In a major you used to get 200 quality points for beating world's #1.

This was the case in 2001 as well though, with Venus. In 2000 she beat #1 and #2 to win the title. But in 2001, she WAS ranked number two, so regardless of how she did at Wimbledon, she was going to lose some ranking points.

While it sucks this year for the players defending, any title, getting rid of those "quality" points is worth it.

Mother_Marjorie
Jun 15th, 2006, 01:52 PM
You are retarded. How is that not fair? You give WS fans a bad name.

:tape: :lol: :tape: :tape:

Mother_Marjorie
Jun 15th, 2006, 01:53 PM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(

Justine just defended the French Open and moved up to #3 from #5. And its not too difficult to figure out why that happened. Can you? Heck, Justine didn't even play as many clay court tournaments leading up to the French.

There is nothing wrong with the ranking system. The top three players are defending grand slam champions. If Venus were able to play more often, she might have been in the top ten.

Marcus1979
Jun 15th, 2006, 01:58 PM
Petrova lost first round who was defending Semifinalist pts

Sharapova lost in R16 and was defending QuarterFinalist pts

JackFrost
Jun 15th, 2006, 02:03 PM
Maybe she will not defend her titel at all and this discussion is for nothing. ;)

rjd1111
Jun 15th, 2006, 03:57 PM
just remember it was this scenario that allowed Venus to get to #1 in 2002 when Jennifer Capriati didn't gain any pts when she won Australian Open as she won it the year prior ;)

Gotta put things into perspective

Jen and Hingis took a month off after that Marathon Final in the heat.
Probably suffering from heat exhaustion. Venus took advantage of
this by securing a wild Card at the next tournament when Serena
pulled out. She played three events in a row. I think she won 2
and made the finals of the 3rd thus taking the No1 spot on Feb 25th
Jen lost No1 from taking the month or so off and not being able
to play.

faboozadoo15
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:01 PM
why is Venus being outed when I only used her as an example :(
:tape: because it's clear that you just THOUGHT this up when you realized venus's ranking would go down even further if she doesn't defend wimbledon. half the year is over and you JUST realized this?

sfselesfan
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:03 PM
That's just the way is works. Venus will have to play better this hardcourt season to move up.

SF

rjd1111
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:12 PM
With the old system Venus could even loose points even when she defends her title. Because it would be still possible that she gets less Bonuspoints when she beats just lower ranked players then the year before. So what do you think? Which system is now the better? ;)


Yes, I remember a few yrs ago Venus was ranked No 2 behind Hingis.
Jen and Dav were ranked 3 & 4. Venus beat both of them and won the event
yet, the next monday She fell below them in the rankings. This was UNFAIR.

WorldWar24
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:14 PM
LOl

Better late than never... right?

:haha:

GracefulVenus
Jun 15th, 2006, 04:21 PM
Uh all you guys need to lay of VeeDaQueen...........not everyone knows how the ranking system works.......don't be so hard on people........geeeeezz.

hingis-seles
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:08 PM
The ranking system is racist and therefore, must be abolished.

kosmikgroove
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:14 PM
Question: Justine defended the FO but moved from #5 to #3. Was this a result of the 2 in front of her not defending their FO points?

DragonFlame
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:37 PM
:haha: this thread made my day :lol:

badunka
Jun 15th, 2006, 05:57 PM
Question: Justine defended the FO but moved from #5 to #3. Was this a result of the 2 in front of her not defending their FO points?

Petrova was defendign SF points so she fell.

VeeDaQueen
Jun 15th, 2006, 08:40 PM
holy shit! i've never seen such a sad group of people who only come to these message boards to attack, make fun of, and to attack some more. seriously, NONE of you have lives, do you? there are some people that i think NEVER leave these message boards. i do not deserve all this bashing, nor does anyone. there have been some very ignorant people on this board, and none of them have had this much bashing done to them. y'all are PATHETIC :rolleyes:

Mother_Marjorie
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:18 PM
holy shit! i've never seen such a sad group of people who only come to these message boards to attack, make fun of, and to attack some more. seriously, NONE of you have lives, do you? there are some people that i think NEVER leave these message boards. i do not deserve all this bashing, nor does anyone. there have been some very ignorant people on this board, and none of them have had this much bashing done to them. y'all are PATHETIC :rolleyes:

Its karma.

You get back what you put out.

You deserve it.

Direwolf
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:45 PM
Jen and Hingis took a month off after that Marathon Final in the heat.
Probably suffering from heat exhaustion. Venus took advantage of
this by securing a wild Card at the next tournament when Serena
pulled out. She played three events in a row. I think she won 2
and made the finals of the 3rd thus taking the No1 spot on Feb 25th
Jen lost No1 from taking the month or so off and not being able
to play.

I remember that...Venus could have played Mauresmo 3 times in 3 weeks...Vee won Paris n Antwerp but lost in the SF to Sanrine Testude...she could have taken it to 3 sets...but she lost the 2nd set TB(?), it was France vs USA in that SF... then fast forward... She was to play ANNA KOURNIKOUVA in the 2nd round but withdrew becuz she got injured trying to pick up her baggage...giving Capriati her 1 ranking back...which was a wise move so that she and Serena could face off in the Finals of the French.

Carmen Mairena
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:54 PM
Yes, why not add even more points? Just not to lose them EVER? :rolleyes: :tape:

SAEKeithSerena
Jun 15th, 2006, 10:54 PM
i agree, i think points should be added then deducted the following year if needed...

Chrissie-fan
Jun 16th, 2006, 12:42 AM
who says that this was just a pity party for Venus, i was just point Venus out as an example. i don't think it's fair for any GS champion, because with bonus points, you can still gain a few points to help your ranking :)
No system is perfect. I suppose they could introduce a ranking based on the results of, say the past TWO years whereby the results of the past six months count for the full 100%, those of the six months before that for 75% and those from the previous year for 50%. That way current results would be rewarded the most (as they should be) without ignoring a players longterm achievements. Having said that, things are already complicated enough as they are.

Besides, I think the prestige that goes with for example being the #1 player in the world has suffered a lot in recent years. In the past when Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles, Hingis or Williams were the #1 players it was accepted that they were really the best players on the planet at that particular point in time. Now with the top spot changing hands every couple of weeks or so (or so it seems), this is no longer the case.

Justine Fan
Jun 16th, 2006, 01:02 AM
:smash: dumbest thread of the year.

It's all part and parcel of defending your title.

I agree with you!

Justine Fan
Jun 16th, 2006, 01:09 AM
Maybe she will not defend her titel at all and this discussion is for nothing. ;)

OMG :eek: Can you imagine what it would be like on WTA World if that were to happen? What would the Venus fans be like? :fiery: :fiery: :fiery: :fiery:

Justine Fan
Jun 16th, 2006, 01:12 AM
The ranking system is racist and therefore, must be abolished.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

:haha: :haha: :haha:

Justine Fan
Jun 16th, 2006, 01:14 AM
Its karma.

You get back what you put out.

You deserve it.

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Scotso
Jun 16th, 2006, 03:15 AM
I really fail to see how this is unfair.

VeeDaQueen
Jun 16th, 2006, 03:22 AM
wow, people still posting in the most rediculous thread of the year :hearts:

St.Sebastian
Jun 16th, 2006, 04:16 PM
How about punishing players who lose in the 1st round of a Slam and win it the year after.... I mean, they should at least try to maintain a certain level...

rjd1111
Jun 16th, 2006, 04:45 PM
No system is perfect. I suppose they could introduce a ranking based on the results of, say the past TWO years whereby the results of the past six months count for the full 100%, those of the six months before that for 75% and those from the previous year for 50%. That way current results would be rewarded the most (as they should be) without ignoring a players longterm achievements. Having said that, things are already complicated enough as they are.

Besides, I think the prestige that goes with for example being the #1 player in the world has suffered a lot in recent years. In the past when Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles, Hingis or Williams were the #1 players it was accepted that they were really the best players on the planet at that particular point in time. Now with the top spot changing hands every couple of weeks or so (or so it seems), this is no longer the case.


The prestige of the No1 spot went away when Hingis stayed No1 for
so long by playing Marathon Tennis every week and not winning any
slams for years.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jun 16th, 2006, 04:55 PM
quality points are gone?

Kenny
Jun 16th, 2006, 05:00 PM
wow, people still posting in the most rediculous thread of the year :hearts:

I think you used the wrong smiley. I think you meant to use this one.. ":eek:'


and I mean to use this one at the title change.. and this whole tread.. :rolleyes:

:wavey:

Carsten
Jun 16th, 2006, 06:28 PM
there's nothing unfair with it if you understand how the Rankings work ;)

Aaron.
Jun 16th, 2006, 06:30 PM
This Thread..lot of hate! but i love it :hearts:

Aaron.
Jun 16th, 2006, 06:30 PM
The ranking system is racist and therefore, must be abolished. :haha: :haha:

Aaron.
Jun 16th, 2006, 06:34 PM
wow, people still posting in the most rediculous thread of the year :hearts: the most funniest thread of the year :hearts:

VeeDaQueen
Jun 16th, 2006, 11:14 PM
the most funniest thread of the year :hearts:

i concur :hearts: i'll be laughing all the way to the vCash bank :lol:

LoveFifteen
Jun 16th, 2006, 11:52 PM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(

You just realized this? :retard:

This is how it works for all tournaments, not just for Slams, and not just for your precious QUEEN VEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Volcana
Jun 17th, 2006, 03:34 AM
I just realized that if a player defends their grand slam, they still won't go up in the rankings, only if players above them lose major points. It really sucks, because If venus defends, she won't go anywhere in the rankings :(The rankings aren't important.