[JennyS]

I think that the Champions Race is very flawed and really should be looked at in the future. I originally thought the Race was determined by best 17 results before the championships, but I was wrong. The WTA is adding points from all tournaments, thus rewarding quantity over quality.

I have no problem with players wanting to play as many tournaments as they want to, but this race is unfair. If a player with 27 tournaments has just 10 more race points than someone with 19 tournaments, then the second player is much more deserving.

The ATP's race is much more accurate because it counts a maximum of 18 tournaments. Only five tournaments outside the Slams and Masters Series events can count. The top four guys in the race all won slams and of the player who are 5-8, all but Moya got to a Slam semifinal.

Basically, the only spot that should be up for grabs is #8 (although with Lindsay likely out #9 should get in to the tournament too).

 

[ys]

I think that the Champions Race is very flawed and really should be looked at in the future. I originally thought the Race was determined by best 17 results before the championships, but I was wrong. The WTA is adding points from all tournaments, thus rewarding quantity over quality.

I have no problem with players wanting to play as many tournaments as they want to, but this race is unfair. If a player with 27 tournaments has just 10 more race points than someone with 19 tournaments, then the second player is much more deserving.

Tennis is not pure sport. Tennis, especially women's tennis, needs to make money. So consider that "unfair" advantage as a token of appreciation from WTA Tour to those who supports The Tour by playing more tournaments. Rules are the same for everyone.