PDA

View Full Version : Dimitrij Ovtcharov The New World Number 1!



TableTennisDaily
12-15-2017, 09:24 AM
NEWS FLASH! Dimitrij Ovtcharov will be the World Number 1 table tennis player next month (January 2018) after his round of 16 victory against Koki Niwa at the World Tour Grand Finals today!

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/images/dimitrijovtcharovworldnumber12018.jpg

What a year it’s been for Dimitrij Ovtcharov! Firstly, winning the China Open where he defeated team mate Timo Boll in the final. Dimitrij followed suit with this at the World Cup where he won his first major defeating Boll in the final.

A few weeks later Dimitrij took out China’s Fan Zhendong in the semi final of the German Open. In the final Ovtcharov was victorious over oncw again over Timo Boll!

These 3 major wins have put Dimitrij currently world number 3 on the December World Rankings behind Ma Long and Fan Zhendong. However, as of January 2018, the ITTF are implementing a new world ranking system whereby players are ranked on how far they reached in events. Here’s a video that the ITTF released on the new system:

What do you think of this new system? Leave your comments below.

ILoveTT
12-15-2017, 09:39 AM
Well don Dimitrij you worked hard for this. Now go win the tournament!

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-15-2017, 09:42 AM
its a ridiculous ranking system. Everyone knows MA Long is the real #1

TTHopeful
12-15-2017, 10:13 AM
If Ma Long played China and German Open he would still be number 1

Suga D
12-15-2017, 10:17 AM
If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

[Emoji12]

QWERTY Spin
12-15-2017, 10:47 AM
Dima ovtcharov is player of the year in my book. im happy for him. I do think that the new ranking system does not show your legacy as good and i dislike that. But Dima is not to blame for that.
Congratulations to him !

WorkerBee
12-15-2017, 10:48 AM
Ma Long has been the undisputed #1 for a long time. But the time has come for some new players to keep the throne warm for the ascension of Tomokazu in 2019. In Game of Thrones language, we could witness the start of a new dynasty. Dima is fully qualified and respectable. He's currently a cloud-walker, but all the cloud-walkers will give way to the close-to-the-table attackers soon. These Tomo types are learning the Bruce Lee method (close and quick). If Dima learns the Tomo approach and Tomo learns some cloud-walking, we are all in for an amazing decade, and Dima would be a major player. I will miss seeing the Chinese style of cloud-walking monsters who plant their feet to fire the rockets from 15 feet off the table. Congratulations to Dima who dared to join this gang!

ping fun
12-15-2017, 11:58 AM
Dima can be happy for his number one just for 1 or 2 month . But its chinese who will come and show who the real boss is ...

yoass
12-15-2017, 12:12 PM
its a ridiculous ranking system. Everyone knows MA Long is the real #1

Let's call Ma Long the GOAT en Dimitrij Ovtcharov the GOTY. Will that make you happy?

TableTennis BelgiumTV
12-15-2017, 05:05 PM
Congratulations Dima ! :cool:

I will try to publish another Training Session with Dima and Boll on my Channel Tonight !

songdavid98
12-15-2017, 06:57 PM
The new ranking system measures who is more successful rather than who is a better player.

This system... I can see why it was changed (to make players more active), but I don't like it

NextLevel
12-15-2017, 07:15 PM
The new ranking system measures who is more successful rather than who is a better player.

This system... I can see why it was changed (to make players more active), but I don't like it

Your likes against mine, buddy!

TableTennis BelgiumTV
12-15-2017, 09:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xRhefic1hA&index=38&list=PL01oOrfL_v48b7wg-quGziZRSDyY61XbB

tropical
12-15-2017, 09:28 PM
Does anyone know if this new rating is only for table tennis or it is for other sports like tennis, badminton, etc. individual sport type?

TTHopeful
12-16-2017, 12:18 AM
Does anyone know if this new rating is only for table tennis or it is for other sports like tennis, badminton, etc. individual sport type?

Tennis have a similar rating i think

sanavasaraja
12-17-2017, 09:14 AM
It's sort of like snooker and darts aswell, although over there it's about the price money specifically. That's not too much of a big deal since those sports aren't very physically demanding at all. I'd really like the ranking to be a more accurate depiction of ability though :(

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-17-2017, 11:24 AM
Ovtcharov is #1 in TT, like Marcelo Rios or Caroline Wozniacki were #1 in Tennis

NextLevel
12-17-2017, 11:32 AM
Ovtcharov is #1 in TT, like Marcelo Rios or Caroline Wozniacki were #1 in Tennis

Yes, and you can't take that away from him like you can't take that away from them. You can add Timo to that statement as well.

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-17-2017, 11:42 AM
4-0 FAN Zhendong got his revenge from his "surprise" defeat at the German Open. He was very determined not only to win, but win 4-0. Ovtcharov choked in the last set when he got 2 set points. He wanted to win at least 1 game because well, its a bit an embarrassing result.

Dima played very well, but FZD played so much better. Well done !!

NextLevel
12-17-2017, 11:44 AM
4-0 FAN Zhendong got his revenge from his "surprise" defeat at the German Open. He was very determined not only to win, but win 4-0. Ovtcharov choked in the last set when he got 2 set points. He wanted to win at least 1 game because well, its a bit an embarrassing result.

Dima played very well, but FZD played so much better. Well done !!

I know people like the "choked" meme, but how exactly did Dima choke?

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-17-2017, 11:47 AM
At 10-8 in the last set when receiving, he missed a easy (for him) BH loop, and it seems to be FZD missed his serve somewhat on the next serve, serving rather high, but instead of taking of advantage of it, he just tried to push it, it was a late decision and it was a net ball.

You could see from his body language he wasn't in the mood to win

NextLevel
12-17-2017, 11:50 AM
At 10-8 in the last set when receiving, he missed a easy (for him) BH loop, and it seems to be FZD missed his serve somewhat on the next serve, serving rather high, but instead of taking of advantage of it, he just tried to push it, it was a late decision and it was a net ball.

You could see from his body language he wasn't in the mood to win

Did you see how many of those BH loops Dima missed throughout the match? They figured out something that Dima couldn't read properly and used it a lot, had nothing to do with choking in that particular moment.

As for the serve, the replay showed that the second bounce was abominably low. I thought Dima choked but when I saw the replay, I looked for the high bounce after the ball landed on Dima's side and it wasn't there.

zzzuppp
12-17-2017, 12:28 PM
Dima - King for a day

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-17-2017, 12:59 PM
Dima - King for a day

TBH he managed to beat Harimoto and LGY. 2 very tough matches as a boss. I didn't expect him to do so well.

FZD didn't spank 4-0 a diminished Ovtcharov. He did so when Dima was in the form of his life....and it just looked like normal business for FZD...

I think that must be an error in translation, but in the aftermatch interview, he said that match was a good practice for future competitions... !!!
Even if thats not the true translation, there's some kind of truth here...

NextLevel
12-17-2017, 01:33 PM
They are still playing Super League in China hence his comment.

Raylazyfo
12-18-2017, 01:05 PM
So Dima is no.1 in the new ranking list but does anyone know who the rest of the top 20 are?

Suga D
12-18-2017, 05:05 PM
So Dima is no.1 in the new ranking list but does anyone know who the rest of the top 20 are?
There ya go
http://teststats.alfaweb.gr/index.php?option=com_fabrik&view=list&listid=80&Itemid=237

rainneverever
12-18-2017, 08:13 PM
Here are calculated ranking points based on the announced rules of World Ranking in Jan 2018
Top 10 Men
1. Dimitrij Ovtcharov 16545
2. Fan Zhendong 15870
3. Timo Boll 15165
4. Lin Gaoyuan 14244
5. Xu Xin 13810
6. Koki Niwa 13155
7. Ma Long 13040
7. Wong Chun Ting 13040
9. Simon Gauzy 12758
10. Kenta Matsudaira 11835
Some other players' points to get a sense of how the ranking works
11. Tomokazu Harimoto 11760
13. Jun Mizutani 11210
14. Lee Sang Su 11145
21. Fang Bo 9910


Top 10 Women
1. Chen Meng 16845
2. Zhu Yuling 16185
3. Feng Tianwei 14195
4. Kasumi Ishikawa 13830
5. Mima Ito 13230
6. Miu Hirano 12796
7. Cheng I Ching 12375
8. Wang Manyu 11688
9. Doo Hoi Kem 11589
10. Chen Xingtong 11472
Some other players' points to get a sense of how the ranking works
21. Ding Ning 9630
24. Liu Shiwen 9365


I am very looking forward to the odds that the bidding companies will give next year.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-18-2017, 08:58 PM
Unseeded (if I recall its top 16 seeded only):
21. Ding Ning 9630
24. Liu Shiwen 9365
bidding companies winning here

Zaid323918
12-19-2017, 12:21 AM
Wow ML gonna be #7. He's got a lotta butt to whip next year.

jamesmith
12-19-2017, 01:43 AM
this new system is prevent Chinese player to be all on the top, so that they might play each other at the last 16 or 32, so that some other country players have chance to get into the semi or Final, this will get more people to come to watch, otherwise it will be all the time Chinese players in to the last 4, it could be boring and less people come to watch.

RidTheKid
12-19-2017, 06:17 AM
My input: A flawed system in other words. Personally I'm only interested in watching the absolute best players face off against eachother for the highest accolades. Watching a European in the final because the system is tweaked that way is simply corruption masked as the norm.


this new system is prevent Chinese player to be all on the top, so that they might play each other at the last 16 or 32, so that some other country players have chance to get into the semi or Final, this will get more people to come to watch, otherwise it will be all the time Chinese players in to the last 4, it could be boring and less people come to watch.

yoass
12-19-2017, 07:49 AM
My input: A flawed system in other words. Personally I'm only interested in watching the absolute best players face off against eachother for the highest accolades. Watching a European in the final because the system is tweaked that way is simply corruption masked as the norm.

I don't necessarily agree. Yet when at a high-level tournament I always tend to think the same thing.

And that is: in a pool of strong players, every game played in the main tournament has the characteristics of a final. We still get to see these games being played, and I don't see much difference between Ma Long playing Fan Zhendong in the round of 16 and the same playing the final.

I have this penchant about not caring for winning or losing all that much, that may be why (to me) is is of little consequence which games happen in which phase of the tournament. That being said, the randomness now introduced might help stir up things a bit. Somehow I got the idea that the somewhat despondent, timid attitude I think I see when opponents encounter one of the Golden Generation has lessened somewhat. We noticed, or perhaps I imagined that, a change came over the players after Timo Boll ousted LGY and ML; as if suddenly the players started believing they had a chance to win, gained a bit more confidence, a change in mental attitude that actually closed the gap. A bit.

If the new system makes players believe they have fighting chance, than they just might really have one every now and then. That would be a beneficial side-effect to a flawed system. I think.

RidTheKid
12-19-2017, 08:19 AM
But it's not the true picture of who's best if Ma Long beats Fzd in the round of 16 while Apolonia journeys to the semis because of easier matches. That is not something that is fair. Who wants to see Germany vs Jamaica in the final of World Cup of football? No one will the take the system seriously. If you're a less skilled performer you shouldn't get to the final because of the system, but because you earned it by beating the more skilled ones. The system should be in favor of no one simply put.


I don't necessarily agree. Yet when at a high-level tournament I always tend to think the same thing.

And that is: in a pool of strong players, every game played in the main tournament has the characteristics of a final. We still get to see these games being played, and I don't see much difference between Ma Long playing Fan Zhendong in the round of 16 and the same playing the final.

I have this penchant about not caring for winning or losing all that much, that may be why (to me) is is of little consequence which games happen in which phase of the tournament. That being said, the randomness now introduced might help stir up things a bit. Somehow I got the idea that the somewhat despondent, timid attitude I think I see when opponents encounter one of the Golden Generation has lessened somewhat. We noticed, or perhaps I imagined that, a change came over the players after Timo Boll ousted LGY and ML; as if suddenly the players started believing they had a chance to win, gained a bit more confidence, a change in mental attitude that actually closed the gap. A bit.

If the new system makes players believe they have fighting chance, than they just might really have one every now and then. That would be a beneficial side-effect to a flawed system. I think.

yoass
12-19-2017, 08:41 AM
But it's not the true picture of who's best if Ma Long beats Fzd in the round of 16 while Apolonia journeys to the semis because of easier matches. That is not something that is fair.

I think you have to let go of that notion of fairness. There is no fairness in tournament play.

You can take some preconceived notion of ranking to have the higher-ranked play one another later on in the tournament. This is unfair, of course, to the players that for some or other reason have a rank not matching their "true level" (whatever that may be). It is unfair to developing players (rising in level), making them fight uphill battles all the time (Harimoto); it is unfair to established (but waning) players, giving them (relatively) easy early opponents (ZJK). And then there is this notion of "angstgegner", someone inexplicably hard to play for a certain player. Regardless of rating, this will wreak havoc on the ordering — disturbing the implicitly defined "desirable outcome" in the gameplay in the later rounds.

Any ordering induced introduces unfairness. Now let's try to think of another way. What would it be like if everybody played everybody, and then determine the winner some or other way? Even that isn't fair. Fatigue does take its toll at some point, and even the happen-stance ordering of matches has an affect. Those starting out with a winning streak after a few easy matches and those having to endure the onslaught of a series of pitched battles at the start of the tournament are not on an equal footing.

So to me it's unfair anyway, and every match in such a high-level tournament is a final. If Tiago Apollonia cruises to the quarterfinals whereas Ma Long has to struggle, that is by no means worse than the reverse — in which Tiago gets stiff competition already in the first rounds, but Long gets the easy start.

Rigging the tournament schedule in such a way that expectations about performance are more easily met by the higher-ranked is not fair either. Nothing is. There is no fairness in competition.

Astorix
12-19-2017, 09:08 AM
I don't necessarily agree. Yet when at a high-level tournament I always tend to think the same thing.

And that is: in a pool of strong players, every game played in the main tournament has the characteristics of a final. We still get to see these games being played, and I don't see much difference between Ma Long playing Fan Zhendong in the round of 16 and the same playing the final.

I have this penchant about not caring for winning or losing all that much, that may be why (to me) is is of little consequence which games happen in which phase of the tournament. That being said, the randomness now introduced might help stir up things a bit. Somehow I got the idea that the somewhat despondent, timid attitude I think I see when opponents encounter one of the Golden Generation has lessened somewhat. We noticed, or perhaps I imagined that, a change came over the players after Timo Boll ousted LGY and ML; as if suddenly the players started believing they had a chance to win, gained a bit more confidence, a change in mental attitude that actually closed the gap. A bit.

If the new system makes players believe they have fighting chance, than they just might really have one every now and then. That would be a beneficial side-effect to a flawed system. I think.


Unfortunately the streaming quality of a round 32/16 match is much below a quarterfinal match or higher :(

RidTheKid
12-19-2017, 09:10 AM
Ma Long "cruises" only because of skill, not because of system, and vice versa for a less skilled player. Who truthfully wants the big names to drop like flies in the first rounds because they met another big name early on? That killes the prestige and drama, at least for me. I choose to do things because they're hard, the challenge. That is why Achilles cried after he killed off Hector. He had no one left to challenge him and get the best out of him. My interpretation solely :)


I think you have to let go of that notion of fairness. There is no fairness in tournament play.

You can take some preconceived notion of ranking to have the higher-ranked play one another later on in the tournament. This is unfair, of course, to the players that for some or other reason have a rank not matching their "true level" (whatever that may be). It is unfair to developing players (rising in level), making them fight uphill battles all the time (Harimoto); it is unfair to established (but waning) players, giving them (relatively) easy early opponents (ZJK). And then there is this notion of "angstgegner", someone inexplicably hard to play for a certain player. Regardless of rating, this will wreak havoc on the ordering — disturbing the implicitly defined "desirable outcome" in the gameplay in the later rounds.

Any ordering induced introduces unfairness. Now let's try to think of another way. What would it be like if everybody played everybody, and then determine the winner some or other way? Even that isn't fair. Fatigue does take its toll at some point, and even the happen-stance ordering of matches has an affect. Those starting out with a winning streak after a few easy matches and those having to endure the onslaught of a series of pitched battles at the start of the tournament are not on an equal footing.

So to me it's unfair anyway, and every match in such a high-level tournament is a final. If Tiago Apollonia cruises to the quarterfinals whereas Ma Long has to struggle, that is by no means worse than the reverse — in which Tiago gets stiff competition already in the first rounds, but Long gets the easy start.

Rigging the tournament schedule in such a way that expectations about performance are more easily met by the higher-ranked is not fair either. Nothing is. There is no fairness in competition.

Xylit
12-19-2017, 09:52 AM
Forget about "'#1 = best player in the world" but rather see it as "#1 = most succesful player of the last year" and everything is fine and uncomplicated. In a few months no one cares anymore.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-19-2017, 09:52 AM
I think you have to let go of that notion of fairness. There is no fairness in tournament play.


Seeding needs to be accurate
now our beloved world tour seeding is based on participation
and to make it worse, there is also questions why looser get so many points

my post from another thread:

If player A plays 3 Tours, player B plays 6

Player A
1) wins platinum
2) SF platinum
3) SF platinum
Total points 2250 + 1800 + 1800 = 5850

Player B
1) Looser R16, platinum
2) Looser R16, platinum
3) Looser R32, platinum
4) Looser R32, platinum
5) QF normal tour
6) Looser R32, normal tour
points: 1350 + 1350 + 1125 + 1125 + 1260 + 900 = 7110

Player A will be ranked lower than Player B
Player B has never made it into Top 16 on platinum tour
Player A has always been into Top 4
Even if player A wins all 3 platinum tours, that is only 6750 points and still ranked lower than Player B, thus lower seeded

I think looser point ratio is way too high

yoass
12-19-2017, 10:29 AM
Seeding needs to be accurate

One might wish so. Yet that to me that is a pipe dream. The accuracy of the seeding, after all, gets (in)validated only by the results — and these results are very much dependent on the seeding. A tainted feedback loop.

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-19-2017, 11:25 AM
TT becoming ridiculous

jawien
12-19-2017, 11:32 AM
Seeding needs to be accurate
now our beloved world tour seeding is based on participation [...]

I read the discussion between yoass and RidTheKid and I thought it was maybe not that important, because these anomalies would occur only in the beginning when the new ranking is introduced. After some time they should stabilize.

But man! 2250 for winning a Platinium and 900 for making it to the 32 of a normal event ... this is insane. And Tony's Table Tennis calculations ... I don't know how it works out but there is a danger that players like Ma Long will be under ranked permanently, and this is no good for sure.

RidTheKid
12-19-2017, 12:17 PM
Well they can easily make the dream come true instead of trying to create obstacles for China. I'm Swedish and we certainly have a fine TT history but I simply love China and their dedication to the sport, it's admirable and should be commended. It's up to the other countries to come up with ways to beat them in the tournaments, not winning because all the chinese beat the chinese. We beat China 1989 in what is called "The feat". It was an amazing accomplishment. Why? Not because China was bad, I'll tell you that.


One might wish so. Yet that to me that is a pipe dream. The accuracy of the seeding, after all, gets (in)validated only by the results — and these results are very much dependent on the seeding. A tainted feedback loop.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-19-2017, 12:33 PM
I read the discussion between yoass and RidTheKid and I thought it was maybe not that important, because these anomalies would occur only in the beginning when the new ranking is introduced. After some time they should stabilize.

But man! 2250 for winning a Platinium and 900 for making it to the 32 of a normal event ... this is insane. And Tony's Table Tennis calculations ... I don't know how it works out but there is a danger that players like Ma Long will be under ranked permanently, and this no good for sure.

Yep
He is 3000 points behind Dima
and if ML gets 2000 and Dima gets 1300, ML will need 700x5 to catch up or until old points fall away

Tony's Table Tennis
12-19-2017, 12:39 PM
Well they can easily make the dream come true instead of trying to create obstacles for China. I'm Swedish and we certainly have a fine TT history but I simply love China and their dedication to the sport, it's admirable and should be commended. It's up to the other countries to come up with ways to beat them in the tournaments, not winning because all the chinese beat the chinese. We beat China 1989 in what is called "The feat". It was an amazing accomplishment. Why? Not because China was bad, I'll tell you that.

I thought the USATT and Rating Central method of measuring players rating point is fair based on win/loose.
So such seeding is a good reflection of players level for seeding

IE if no name player beats Ma Long in R32 and looses in R16, he only gets 1350 points - which is also not fair for gaining so little point for defeating a top champion

yoass
12-19-2017, 12:51 PM
IE if no name player beats Ma Long in R32 and looses in R16, he only gets 1350 points - which is also not fair for gaining so little point for defeating a top champion

Yes, an adaptive scoring method in which you supply a base ranking for new players, gain points upon wins in proportion to the difference in ranking and conversely lose points upon losses in proportion does make some sense. We actually use such a system.

Even in that system, opportunities are inequal. If I encounter Ma Long, I stand to lose nothing (the difference in ranking is that big) but have a very small chance of gaining a lot. That just might happen, a strike of lightning during the match or somesuch catastrophe would do that. More realistically, if I encounter a beatable opponent I get to win points, while someone at my skill level that keeps bumping into the near-immortals doesn't.

rainneverever
12-19-2017, 01:12 PM
The major problem of the new ranking system is the difference between results is way too small. Runnerup gets 0.9x of points of winner, SF gets 0.8x of points of winner, QF gets 0.7x of points of winner. While for tennis (ATP), runnerup gets 0.6x of points of winner, SF gets 0.36x points of winner, QF gets 0.18x of points of winner.

https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2016/07/ITTF-World-Ranking-description-2018-final.pdf

jawien
12-19-2017, 01:28 PM
The major problem of the new ranking system is the difference between results is way too small.

If the new system really works this way, than - Yes, you are exactly right. Basically what it would come down to is that everybody have to be present at every Platinium and Normal event (I don't know about Challengers)? I hope Ittf made sure it's possible to participate so much in pro tours for every country? Otherwise the ranking system might be just inaccurate.

[Just assert myself, I don't know specifics, only what I read from you]

brokenball
12-19-2017, 01:55 PM
I don't like this new system. Ratings Central is better. The new system seems to award points for just doing well many times. The more you play the more chances you have to win points. It would be simpler to just add up the money won by each player over the last 6 months or year.

Do these points ever get reset or do you lose points that were won after a period of time?

A very long time ago I use to play competitive bridge. 'master points' were awarded on a scale based on the number of players and how you placed. Some people that played for a long time accumulated enough points to be call masters but they weren't that good. They were 'masters' only because they played a lot.

It seems to me the new ITTF rating system is like that.

On top of that I have never liked single elimination tournaments. There should be round robins. Sometimes #2 in the finals is not better than #3 but #2 and #3 don't get to play because they are seeded in different branches.

Personally, I don't care. If I were a pro I would only be interested in the money. You can't spend ratings.

piligrim
12-19-2017, 02:14 PM
this new system is prevent Chinese player to be all on the top, so that they might play each other at the last 16 or 32, so that some other country players have chance to get into the semi or Final, this will get more people to come to watch, otherwise it will be all the time Chinese players in to the last 4, it could be boring and less people come to watch.

if other country players want to get to semi and final they just should practice and get better. but why to work hard if you can change ranking system and became number 1 without win anybody

Loopadoop
12-19-2017, 02:27 PM
brokenball said "You can't spend rating."

If you have a good rating, it should enhance your value to: manufacturers for endorsements, clubs for league play, other potential monetary gains.

Suga D
12-19-2017, 02:29 PM
But it's not the true picture of who's best if Ma Long beats Fzd in the round of 16 while Apolonia journeys to the semis because of easier matches. That is not something that is fair. Who wants to see Germany vs Jamaica in the final of World Cup of football? No one will the take the system seriously. If you're a less skilled performer you shouldn't get to the final because of the system, but because you earned it by beating the more skilled ones. The system should be in favor of no one simply put.

Nah man. Just read Xylit´s post again.
You should see the ranking list as what it is: namely WHO WAS MOST SUCCESFUL LATELY
The ranking list doesn´t tell who is the bestest of the best. So to find out who is the best player of them all there is a tournament called WTTC, and maybe even Olympics.
But with these tournaments it´s hard to tell who has been the MOST SUCCESFUL.
And if the ranking list would be able to display that it would make above mentioned tournaments like WTTC a bit obsolete (at least to a degree) How many best players can there be? And what would be the purpose of having the ranking list then...

Think about it!
[Emoji6]


Forget about "'#1 = best player in the world" but rather see it as "#1 = most succesful player of the last year" and everything is fine and uncomplicated. In a few months no one cares anymore.

Exactly. Thank you.


TT becoming ridiculous

I don´t remember you being so negative...

jamesmith
12-19-2017, 03:16 PM
in this case , it should not have seed players. Just put everybody in the draw to see who plays who

jamesmith
12-19-2017, 03:18 PM
I don't necessarily agree. Yet when at a high-level tournament I always tend to think the same thing.

And that is: in a pool of strong players, every game played in the main tournament has the characteristics of a final. We still get to see these games being played, and I don't see much difference between Ma Long playing Fan Zhendong in the round of 16 and the same playing the final.

I have this penchant about not caring for winning or losing all that much, that may be why (to me) is is of little consequence which games happen in which phase of the tournament. That being said, the randomness now introduced might help stir up things a bit. Somehow I got the idea that the somewhat despondent, timid attitude I think I see when opponents encounter one of the Golden Generation has lessened somewhat. We noticed, or perhaps I imagined that, a change came over the players after Timo Boll ousted LGY and ML; as if suddenly the players started believing they had a chance to win, gained a bit more confidence, a change in mental attitude that actually closed the gap. A bit.

If the new system makes players believe they have fighting chance, than they just might really have one every now and then. That would be a beneficial side-effect to a flawed system. I think.

In this case it should not have seed players, put everybody in the draw to see who plays who

UpSideDownCarl
12-19-2017, 04:50 PM
When Waldner won the 1997 WTTC Singles title, I think he was ranked #5.

I do think some people are thinking about the WR as something different than it is.

And if a player wins tournament after tournament and plays in World Tour events consistently, they will end up #1.

In other words, the reason Ma Long is not #1 is that he has not played much since China Open in June and has been injured over the last few months.

Therefore, if ML returns to his form of the last few years, he will be #1 again soon.

If not, it will be FZD.

So, the current WR, despite the change in method for calculating, the real reason the top CNT players have slipped in the standings is, at least to some extent, related to them not having played much since JUNE 2017. 6 months of relative inactivity is a lot in one year.

In any sport, a great player who is inactive and then plays and does not perform well, their ranking will likely drop. If not, the ranking system is not actually working properly.

To take back the top spot, it is okay if the player has to earn it.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Tony's Table Tennis
12-19-2017, 05:18 PM
When Waldner won the 1997 WTTC Singles title, I think he was ranked #5.

I do think some people are thinking about the WR as something different than it is.

And if a player wins tournament after tournament and plays in World Tour events consistently, they will end up #1.

In other words, the reason Ma Long is not #1 is that he has not played much since China Open in June and has been injured over the last few months.

Therefore, if ML returns to his form of the last few years, he will be #1 again soon.

If not, it will be FZD.

So, the current WR, despite the change in method for calculating, the real reason the top CNT players have slipped in the standings is, at least to some extent, related to them not having played much since JUNE 2017. 6 months of relative inactivity is a lot in one year.

In any sport, a great player who is inactive and then plays and does not perform well, their ranking will likely drop. If not, the ranking system is not actually working properly.

To take back the top spot, it is okay if the player has to earn it.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Platinum winner gets 2250
2nd place gets 2025
SF gets 1800

Example 1
Ma Long plays 6 plat and wins all 6 = 13500 points
player B plays 7 plat and 2nd places for all 7 = 14175 points

Player B is ranks higher than Ma Long

Example 2
Player B plays 8 plat and gets SF in 7 and 8th one looses in R32 = 13725 points

Player B ranks higher than Ma Long

Example 3
Ma long plays and win 7 = 15750 points
Player 2 plays 8, 6 of them looses in final, 2 of them looses in SF = 15750 points

Player 2 tied world ranking number 1 with Ma Long
world ranking number 1 is a now a joke, no?

The major problem for the new system is that LOOSER can win more than the winner
With the old system, it also took away points for non participants (points expiring)

UpSideDownCarl
12-19-2017, 05:46 PM
Good info Tony. The CNT players will have to enter more events.

A few months of CNT taking 6 of 8 quarterfinal spots and all 4 semifinal spots should have CNT in top 6 spots soon enough. [emoji2]

But it is true. The system sounds flawed. But the best players will have the top spots when they are fully back in action.

And my point about Waldner was, he didn’t need to be ranked #1 to be the best player.

Also, in 2009-2010 during that period when ZJK was not in the top 10, people who understood TT knew he was still one of the top 5 players in terms of real skill level. Maybe top 2.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Tony's Table Tennis
12-19-2017, 06:23 PM
Good info Tony. The CNT players will have to enter more events.

A few months of CNT taking 6 of 8 quarterfinal spots and all 4 semifinal spots should have CNT in top 6 spots soon enough. [emoji2]

But it is true. The system sounds flawed. But the best players will have the top spots when they are fully back in action.

And my point about Waldner was, he didn’t need to be ranked #1 to be the best player.

Also, in 2009-2010 during that period when ZJK was not in the top 10, people who understood TT knew he was still one of the top 5 players in terms of real skill level. Maybe top 2.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

imo ranking is only for seeding for next tours, or world champs or olympics
1 to 4 seeding needs to be accurate
5 to 8 needs to be accurate
9 to 16 needs to be accurate

imagine when Ding Ning faces 1st seed and LSW faces 2nd seed due to them being unseeded due to the new system
If it was Chinese player at 1st and 2nd seed, then I think the world won't complain

Based on 2017 world tour schedule
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/02/wt-mens-singles-standings-aft-swe.pdf
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/02/wt-womens-singles-standings-aft-swe.pdf

In your top 10 mens, only 1 player played more than 8 events in 2017
In your top 10 womens, only 3 players played more than 8 events in 2017
This isn't a CNT problem, this is a world tour scheduling problem as a lot of these events are kind of pointless or even difficult to follow

you get 6 platinums and 6 world tours
It will be silly for any top 20 player to go to challenger series

Here is the schedule:
Seamaster 2018 World Tour Platinum



Qatar Open, Doha: 8-11 March, Qualification 6-7 March
German Open, Bremen: 23-25 March, Qualification 20-22 March
China Open, Shenzhen: 31 May – 3 June, Qualification 29-30 May
Korean Open, Incheon: 19-22 July, Qualification 17-18 July
Australian Open, Gold Coast: 26-29 July, Qualification 24-25 July
Austrian Open, Linz: 8-11 November, Qualification 6-7 November

Seamaster 2018 World Tour



Hungarian Open, Budapest: 18-21 January, Qualification 16-17 January (https://www.ittf.com/tournament/2813/2018/2018-ittf-world-tour-hungarian-open/)
Hong Kong Open, Hong Kong: 24-27 May, Qualification 22-23 May
Japan Open, Fukuoka: 7-10 June, Qualification 4-6 June
Bulgaria Open, Panagyurishte: 16-19 August, Qualification 14-15 August
Czech Open, Olomouc: 23-26 August, Qualification 21-22 August
Swedish Open, Stockholm: 1-4 November, Qualification 29-31 October



As much as your international events, you get your domestic events, injuring/recovery and other activities
Based on 2017 participants, you can see 8 events of the above 12 is not just something as easy to say "players will have to enter more events"

I guess if the prize money is like tennis, it could be different (players source of income is more domestic TT than international TT)
Also, bulk of the 8+ participants are Japanese, we all know they have endless funding due to Tokyo OG.... once that budget is gone, good luck for ITTF to try and promote 8+ participation from everyone

TTHopeful
12-19-2017, 06:28 PM
You have given me a new look on the new system thanks tony. Carl it sounds terrible now doesnt it . . .

tropical
12-19-2017, 06:33 PM
I asked if tennis/badminton have a similar system. Someone said yes but apparently they don't. Something is wrong with ITTF hard heads!

rainneverever
12-19-2017, 06:40 PM
I think Tony and I have already discussed in a previous thread on new WR system, how problematic the points spreading among different results and the tournament spreading among months are.


Here is the breakdown of new WR ranking points in Jan 2018. Clearly the new system awards participation over results. Some think the new ranking system suggests who is more successful lately; true in a sense, as ML attended only 6 tournaments in 2017 (he has WTTC team points from 2016 which are valid for 2 years), he is still ranked #7, higher than the rest of players except 7 players. However, look at WCT who is also ranked #7 and KN who is ranked #6, they end up in QF or R16 most of the time, they do not make to final at all and ML has 3 champions . Who is really successful lately?


Koki Niwa: 13155
1.2100 WTTC QF (2017 May)
2.1785 World Cup QF (2017 Oct)
3.1575 Qatar Open QF (2017 Feb)
4.1575 Japan Open QF (2017 Jun)
5.1575 China Open QF (2017 Jun)
6.1575 Austrian Open QF (2017 Sep)
7.1530 Grand Finals R16 (2017 Dec)
8.1440 ATTC SF (2017 Apr)


Ma Long: 13040
1. 3000 WTTC winner (2017 May)
2. 2250 Qatar Open winner (2017 Feb)
3. 2250 Japan Open winner (2017 Jun)
4. 2040 World Cup 3rd place (2017 Oct)
5. 1350 China Open R16 (2017 Jun)
6. 1250 WTTC Team (2016 Mar)
7. 900 ATTC R32 (2017 Apr)
8.


Wong Chun Ting: 13040
1.2100 WTTC QF (2017 May)
2.2000 WTTC Team (2016 Mar)
3.1800 China Open SF (2017 Jun)
4.1785 Grand Finals QF (2017 Dec)
5.1575 German Open QF (2017 Nov)
6.1350 Qatar Open R16 (2017 Feb)
7.1350 Japan Open R16 (2017 Jun)
8.1080 ATTC R16 (2017 Apr)

UpSideDownCarl
12-19-2017, 08:14 PM
Yeah. It doesn’t sound good. But I still think we will all know who the best players are.

I mean, FZD gave the New #1 4-0. We do know what that means.

And I am happy to confess that I have not spent too much time worrying about this new way in which ITTF can make themselves look like fools.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

jawien
12-19-2017, 09:43 PM
I read the new ranking system, available below:
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2016/07/ITTF-World-Ranking-description-2018-final.pdf
[Ittf]

Point 3.5 is interesting.
"3.5. The ITTF World Rankings take the best 8 results of the player for the senior ranking and best 6for under 21, junior and cadet rankings."

"Best 8 results" + the point in the team events should count (not sure about the WTTC or WTTTC). Not sure if team events would count as one of those 8??

Might alleviate the thing a little, don't you think?

[Edit]
yeah ... rainneverever, now I see how you counted it. ok.

NeatRiver
12-20-2017, 12:09 AM
Awesome, Thank you

drunix80
12-20-2017, 01:35 AM
ITTF is so anti CNT. Chinese TT federation should increase its influence over ITTF to safeguard its interests and players. Fans love players who are at top of the game irrespective of country . There is no need to artificially increase players rankings.

RidTheKid
12-20-2017, 07:52 AM
I might start participating in every possible and impossible event next year and before you know it I'll be the World #1 :p Ridiculous system! And an insult to the GOAT and China as a TT nation.

yoass
12-20-2017, 08:07 AM
I might start participating in every possible and impossible event next year and before you know it I'll be the World #1 :p Ridiculous system! And an insult to the GOAT and China as a TT nation.

Good luck with that! Only your best eight results will count, but somehow there's this nagging suspicion that you'll be burned up quite quickly of you fully engage yourself in every possible and impossible event. I think there's a reason why ZJK, still a young man, has a body that already seems to be beyond recovery. Xu Xin seems at risk too, and perhaps Ma Long also.

C'mon folks, the real reason the Golden Three are forced into taking a bow to Ovtcharov is that they didn't participate, not that the system is rigged intentionally to spite the CNT. And why didn't they? Well, some of it is strain-induced injury. Some of that is no doubt caused by the total amount and stress of high-level competition, but in that balance there's also the training load. The real challenge, in the end, might not be who gets to train hardest and fiercest, but who gets the maximum out of training while staying within the bounds of the amount of abuse that the body can take over a longer amount of time.

But it's not just injury. We shouldn't forget, or take lightly, that matter of the player's (and coaches) revolt at the China Open, after which 'severe penalties' were announced. Silence has reigned since then, but we've also seen suspiciously much less of the Golden Three at the significant events, and when there they've seemed strangely subdued, browbeaten. It's only now that XX and FZD are recovering. Somewhat.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 08:15 AM
ITTF is so anti CNT. Chinese TT federation should increase its influence over ITTF to safeguard its interests and players. Fans love players who are at top of the game irrespective of country . There is no need to artificially increase players rankings.

The moment your SF/QF becomes world number 1
and when your finalist are only world number 5, would be the day that ITTF world ranking loses its credibility

I see this a joke waiting to happen

Since 2018 is WTTTC and have no real effect on how ranking is done
I would love that CNT boycott this by participating equal or lesser than 2017
And give all your "loyal participants" ranked higher and make the ITTF world ranking become ITTF world participation ranking ;)

yoass
12-20-2017, 08:30 AM
The moment your SF/QF becomes world number 1
and when your finalist are only world number 5, would be the day that ITTF world ranking loses its credibility

I see this a joke waiting to happen

Just to play the devil's advocate: if I see the closing games of the big tournaments, it's all very, very close and extremely high level. The margins are very, very small, and the outcome is decided by a hair's thickness — or even by chance, the match being decided by one or two clipped nets and edges.

If that is true, than the relatively small difference in points awarded to winner, runner-up, losing semifinalists is somewhat defensible. These matches are so, so close — then so should the rewards be.

And if that's so, the WR #5 and #6 playing the finals isn't that ridiculous at all, even if a losing semifinalists becomes #1 in that same tournament.

We all (or nearly all) think ML is the GOAT and FZD the Robin to ML's Batman (with XX being the wiley Joker, of course). Aren't we fooling ourselves here, in our desire to fit the course of sports events into a comfortable narrative?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 08:42 AM
Just to play the devil's advocate: if I see the closing games of the big tournaments, it's all very, very close and extremely high level. The margins are very, very small, and the outcome is decided by a hair's thickness — or even by chance, the match being decided by one or two clipped nets and edges.

If that is true, than the relatively small difference in points awarded to winner, runner-up, losing semifinalists is somewhat defensible. These matches are so, so close — then so should the rewards be.

And if that's so, the WR #5 and #6 playing the finals isn't that ridiculous at all, even if a losing semifinalists becomes #1 in that same tournament.

We all (or nearly all) think ML is the GOAT and FZD the Robin to ML's Batman (with XX being the wiley Joker, of course). Aren't we fooling ourselves here, in our desire to fit the course of sports events into a comfortable narrative?

Guess you must have missed this, don't worry, I will repost for you to understand:

Platinum winner gets 2250
2nd place gets 2025
SF gets 1800

Example 1
Ma Long (or who ever your world champion is) plays 6 plat and wins all 6 = 13500 points
player B plays 7 plat and 2nd places for all 7 = 14175 points
Player B is ranks higher than Ma Long

Example 2
Player B plays 8 plat and gets SF in 7 and 8th one looses in R32 = 13725 points
Player B ranks higher than Ma Long

Example 3
Ma long plays and win 7 = 15750 points
Player B plays 8, 6 of them looses in final, 2 of them looses in SF = 15750 points
Player B tied world ranking number 1 with Ma Long
world ranking number 1 is a now a joke, no?


Now to add to that
Example 2 is a player that has never been in a final, but is ranked number 1
Or rather, Example 2 could be 2 to 3 other players, and these 3 are ranked 1,2,3 and MA LONG who wins 6/6 platinum is only world ranked 4 :)
No body has beaten Ma Long, but due the points, he isn't even a top 3 ranked

(PS I know plat is 6 tournaments only, but its the same ratio so I'm using the numbers for total of 8, and ignoring WTTC/OG)

matzreenzi
12-20-2017, 09:03 AM
is YOASS is THOMAS WEIKERT in disguise??? just kidding :D

yoass
12-20-2017, 09:25 AM
Guess you must have missed this

I didn't miss it, Tony, and it's a good example. And even in this example, I tried to point out, there actually is a conceivable perspective in which the ranking you're presenting as counterintuitive/unfair/ridiculous is an understandable choice.

Your example might be a little contrived, in the sense that you have a single outlier that underperforms simply by underparticipating. In the proposed system, an underlying assumption for valid comparison between players A and B is, I think, that they both actually have at least eight results to take into consideration. You might (and do, of course) argue that participating in eight events is an unrealistic demand, and might be right there. I would say that this does not invalidate the ranking method per se, but that this indicates a few parameters (number of events, length of interval of measurement) might be off. But only time will tell.

I actually think this is an application of game theory, in which agents adapt strategies over time. If ranking is a goal, then players will optimize towards attaining it, choosing qualifying events over others. Yes, all kinds of competitions will suffer.

Players might not optimize and try to serve all masters equally, and take on too much. I think this is what you've been pointing out is likely to happen.

And I share your concerns there. But I don't think it's a simple question of a ranking mechanism fairness in itself, and I do sense a fallacy there; the ranking we've known and grown accustomed to is also unfair, unbased, inflexible, and biased. Yet since we've been taking that for granted for so long and we're getting riled up by a change, we're focusing on the horrors of the new. And in truth, I think there's no ranking system that does justice to that strange platonic notion we like to maintain about who's the alpha of the pack. About who's deserving what. There is no fairness, in the end, and noboby deserves anything. Every tournament is either loaded, or a blank slate providing equal chances, without bias. Is there an inbetween?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 09:30 AM
There is just way too many scenario that I can type

IE Ma Long plays 6, wins 4 and 2 of them come 2nd place.
You know how many players can push him down the world ranking

Or Ma Long and FZD or Dima playing 7 and wins 4, 2 in 2nd place, 1 in QF or wins 3, 3 in 2nd place, 1 in QF
Lots of players will end up higher for not even winning 1 world tour

IMO if one can't even win a world tour then one can't be number 1 on ranking points from world tour, surely the weighing of number 1 needs to be "number 1"
number 2 is 90% of number 1 points
number 3 and 4 is 80% of number 1 points
now this is favouring the looser not the winner

Imagine your olympic prize money or grand final prize money is the same ratio
I don't think sane people will be happy about it

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 09:37 AM
GF prize money is

winner USD100k
2nd USD55k
SF USD35k
QF USD25k
R16 USD15k

I wonder why ITTF don't use the same ratio to points for awarding prize money, since its a "winning" formula. Heck, both are rewards, no?

jawien
12-20-2017, 10:44 AM
[...] accustomed too is also unfair, unbased, inflexible, and biased. Yet since we've been taking that for granted for so long and we're getting riled up by a change, we're focusing on the horrors of the new. And in truth, I think there's no ranking system that does justice to that strange platonic notion we like to maintain about who's the alpha of the pack.

Of course time will tell, as of now it highly depends on the participation ability. If Ma or Fan will be able to play those 8 tours ... maybe. But as Tony showed with some examples there are reasons to think that it might produce strange results. It will be laughable if Ma Long wins 6 times (the "Big Platinium") and still looses to somebody else who was second all the time and only played one more time.

Someone earlier compared coefficients for different stages of the draw and compared them with the WTA. Huge difference (if in fact it is correct). I remember a discussion in ~2012 about Aga Radwańska she had a final with Serena Williams - she lost, but shortly after that there was a possibility for Aga becoming a #1 without winning even one Grand Slam. To be fair the system itself was not criticized, but the overall absence of leadership in women's tennis.

Anyway it shows that not only in table tennis, there is this feeling that if you are to be #1 you have to do something special - win the major. Otherwise it's meaningless, it's just a reward for participation.

yoass
12-20-2017, 11:05 AM
Imagine your olympic prize money or grand final prize money is the same ratio
I don't think sane people will be happy about it

I actually would be quite happy to see all participants rewarded equally. For the race is the prize.

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 12:01 PM
Tony keeps on giving these examples where ma long has six events or seven events but not 8. He can't produce one where Ma Long has 8 and the system fails. I wonder why...

The system is not perfect and it might even fail on all fronts but it is better to try than to not do anything. And the fact that a player who was #3 under the old system is #1 under the new system is not the end of the world but some people just see issues all the time with anything the ITTF tries. I agree that there should be a bigger reward for winning, but the ITF also rates all the events not just a max number.

Xylit
12-20-2017, 12:18 PM
Someone has said that the new system is similar to the one used in Tennis. I am a big Tennis fan but have no idea how the ranking system works there but as far as I know the best Tennis players have always been in the top spots so that does not look too bad to me. Who cares if player X is ranked one or two ranks higher or lower. Who cares if the best player in the world is ranked #1 or if the most consistent player of the last year is ranked #1? Does not matter. You just have to interpret the ranking a bit different now.

Another thing. For me it sounds very ridiculous that it could be too much for a professional athlete to compete in eight major events a year. I know they also have national leagues, world championships and olympic games here and there but we are still talking about professional sportsmen. Table tennis is their life. In professional sports it is absolutely normal that a player cannot play at 100% top level always but rather has to keep his health and body in mind as well.

I agree that the prize money of the "bigger" events should be increased though. But I guess if that was so easy it would have been done already.

In the end only titles matter, not the world ranking you once had.

WorkerBee
12-20-2017, 12:27 PM
I find a fundamental flaw in the current system for international table tennis, and I feel that working out accurate rating and ranking systems will not work out until some fundamental changes are made. To me, the fundamental flaw is the huge imbalance between the countries and teams in the ITTF vs Chinese size/structure/culture. One way I think there could be a correction would be to integrate the entire Chinese structure into the entire ITTF structure. It would make China overwhelmingly dominant, but it already is and has been for a long time. There are numerous options for structure, like setting up regional organization in China that functions exactly like having different countries, with for example, having a Beijing Open and a Shanghai Open, and 10 others, open to all ITTF players. If Chinese table tennis remains as it is, it will always dominate in the same way. And this is a political/social issue much bigger than what a handful of table tennis dorks can handle. You can see a tiny reflection of this kind of stuff in the extreme Chinese hostilities against Tomokazu around the internet reflecting hundreds of years of China-Japan conflict. The same is true between China and Germany and England, both of whom have invaded and occupied China in the not too distant past. I truly hope Table Tennis can be a part of a better world where regular people can be friendly and respectful. You may say that I'm a dreamer...

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 12:44 PM
Someone has said that the new system is similar to the one used in Tennis. I am a big Tennis fan but have no idea how the ranking system works there but as far as I know the best Tennis players have always been in the top spots so that does not look too bad to me. Who cares if player X is ranked one or two ranks higher or lower. Who cares if the best player in the world is ranked #1 or if the most consistent player of the last year is ranked #1? Does not matter. You just have to interpret the ranking a bit different now.

Another thing. For me it sounds very ridiculous that it could be too much for a professional athlete to compete in eight major events a year. I know they also have national leagues, world championships and olympic games here and there but we are still talking about professional sportsmen. Table tennis is their life. In professional sports it is absolutely normal that a player cannot play at 100% top level always but rather has to keep his health and body in mind as well.

I agree that the prize money of the "bigger" events should be increased though. But I guess if that was so easy it would have been done already.

In the end only titles matter, not the world ranking you once had.

Those world championships and Olympic games count as well. So the number of tour events required is lower in those years than you think. And those events have more points as well for the top performers.

Even with all the possible inaccuracies, it is better to see what happens over time than to shoot this in the foot before it starts. I expect the top players to easily maintain their rankings with 6 events and their two WTTC or Continental events. But even if they don't it is not the end of the world.

jawien
12-20-2017, 12:50 PM
Another thing. For me it sounds very ridiculous that it could be too much for a professional athlete to compete in eight major events a year.

True, but the thing is the system is far too sensitive to the lack of participation even in one tournament [Edit - considering the 8 tournament count. Not within a year]. Winning 6 Majors in a year! Man ... such achievement - sign of a true champion - should be rewarded. Don't you think?

Besides the schedule might become important too.

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 01:05 PM
True, but the thing is the system is far too sensitive to the lack of participation even in one tournament. Winning 6 Majors in a year! Man ... such achievement - sign of a true champion - should be rewarded. Don't you think?

Besides the schedule might become important too.

And participate in one or two more events and that will close that chapter very quickly.

But people forget when ZJK Was #4 for an extended period of time despite failing the eye test. But because Dima is approximately one or two positions above where he should be by the old system, the world is on fire.

Ding Ning and Liu Shiwen hardly played this year and other than inactivity, remained in top 3
5. Seriously dude? Why would you play if you can do that? And we can't forget Boll... Who despite failing the eye test for most of 2016 kept his ranking. Maybe the fact that the new ranking was coming made him fix his health and play more?

My guess is that they just wanted to force players to play. I am not sure whether the new system is perfect, but I am a believer that anyone can maintain a ranking system that predicts player strength in their basement using a modern computer and that it is better for the ITTF to have a system that encourages players to play to keep their rankings. They are trying to follow tennis and badminton. Let us take time to see whether it works.

jawien
12-20-2017, 01:40 PM
And participate in one or two more events and that will close that chapter very quickly.
[...]
Ding Ning and Liu Shiwen hardly played this year and other than inactivity, remained in top 3
5. Seriously dude? Why would you play if you can do that? And we can't forget Boll...
[...]
My guess is that they just wanted to force players to play.

Just checked, there should be like 13 World Tour events 2018 (6 Platinium) + Cup + WTTC ... hmm well maybe there will be enough events to participate .. I might agree ... time will show.

I'm not defending the old system, but it rather reflected to overall level of each player. Should it be changed - yes.

Still considering imaginary league consisting of 8 tournaments, and Ma winning 6 of them (not even participating in the last two) and still being 2nd ... I don't know.

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 02:01 PM
Just checked, there should be like 13 World Tour events 2018 (6 Platinium) + Cup + WTTC ... hmm well maybe there will be enough events to participate .. I might agree ... time will show.

I'm not defending the old system, but it rather reflected to overall level of each player. Should it be changed - yes.

Still considering imaginary league consisting of 8 tournaments, and Ma winning 6 of them (not even participating in the last two) and still being 2nd ... I don't know.

I think there is another subtle reason why the ITTF is doing this. Let's say you go to a sponsor and say that the #1 player will be there. You want it to be a player who is playing in events not a player who is on the bench injured.

yoass
12-20-2017, 02:11 PM
is YOASS is THOMAS WEIKERT in disguise??? just kidding :D

No, sorry. I'm much closer to Jean-Mi Saive, as far as these things go, but I'm no Jean-Mi either. Sniff.

Brs
12-20-2017, 02:16 PM
Look this is exactly like tennis, as NL has pointed out. Part of being #1 is showing up to play. 8 events a year doesn't seem like too much to ask. Still in WTA both Williamses reduced their tournament schedules to stay healthy, and lesser players got to be ranked above them. Their choice, not sure why anyone else needs to get all wound up about it.

Would you prefer a system with just 1 event that accounts for all the rating points of the year? Because that's where you get to following Tony's logic to it's conclusion.

jawien
12-20-2017, 02:22 PM
I think there is another subtle reason why the ITTF is doing this. Let's say you go to a sponsor and say that the #1 player will be there. You want it to be a player who is playing in events not a player who is on the bench injured.

Yeah, yeah ... apart from that, my critique was probably unjust. Sorry Ittf : ) You have to consider the overall number of tournaments and if we say that Ma Long have points only for 6 ... than it means he didn't participate in the other 9 tournaments ... this is a lot, like for the most of the year.

Yeap, Tony's calculations are still true but you have to consider the overall number of tournaments within the year.

J.

thematrix
12-20-2017, 03:16 PM
Backhand GOD to me xD

rainneverever
12-20-2017, 05:19 PM
zoomtt has compared the old and new ranking system when the new rule was first announced in March in the ability of correct prediction of a match result - higher ranked player beat lower ranked player. The old system got 76% prediction right while the new system got 67% right.
https://zoomtt.com/2017/03/31/new-wr-big-changes-bigger-challenges/

However, there were further changes of the new rule in Oct, such as points for Olympic Games good for 1 year instead of 4 years, winner of World Tour Plat 2250 instead of 2100 (OG, WTTC winner 3000 remain the same), winner of World Tour regular 1800 instead of 1350.
First edition of ranking points table
https://tabletennis523.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/ittf_world_ranking_description_2018.pdf
Final edition of ranking points table
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2016/07/ITTF-World-Ranking-description-2018-final.pdf

Someone said the top players should play in more ITTF tour events which sounds reasonable. But you can take a further look at 2017 world tour participation summary, out of 418 players 0 players played 11 events out of 12 in 2017, 3 played 10 events, 4 played 9 events, 8 players played 8 events. Among them only 3 Japanese players are top 20. And they used to participate a lot. You can count how many played 7 events, 6 events, 5 events (Grand Finals eligibility) and so on.
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/02/wt-mens-singles-standings-aft-swe.pdf

It sounds plausible for players to attend a few more as they can already play 5-6 tour events a year now. But keep in mind there are only 6 plat and 6 regular World Tour a year and for each tournament there are an upper limit of participants (usually no more than 300 and the higher ranked ones enter first). If higher top ranked players decide to play a tour no matter plat or not, lower ranked players would hardly have chance to enter to play. Fewer players are able to play at all and fewer players to achieve good results, is it a good thing or bad thing for TT? The differences between a regular tour and plat tour are prize money and the average level of participants. If all 200 of top 200 players play in a regular tour, why it should be regular instead of plat?

rainneverever
12-20-2017, 05:52 PM
Take a look at World Ranking points, World Tour Standing points and prize money, you will see the inconsistence.
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/10/2017_WT_Points_Allocation.pdf
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/10/2017_WT_PrizeMoney.pdf

World Ranking points for World Tour
Plat 2250/2025/1800/1575/1350/1125
Regular 1800/1620/1440/1260/1080/900

World Tour standing points
Plat 500/300/200/100/50/25
Regular 250/125/63/31/16/8

Prize money for World Tour
Plat 25000/12600/6600/3600/1800/900 for Qatar/Japan/China, 48000/24000/11000/6100/3400/2150 for Australia, 24000/12000/6100/3200/1700/900 for Austria/German
Regular 15000/7600/3500/1800/900/500 for Hungary, 18000/9000/4500/2200/1100/700 for India, 18500/9400/4400/2200/1100/700 for Korea, 17000/8000/4200/2100/1050/600 for Czech, 16000/7800/3800/1900/1000/500 for Bulgaria/Sweden

What you see here, the standing points and prize money almost double if you can go one round further. But not the case for new World Ranking points.

Also take a look at the Grand Finals and World Cup
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/10/2017_MWC_Prospectus_FINAL.pdf

World Ranking points for Grand Finals
2550/2295/2040/1785/1530
World Ranking points for World Cup
2550/2295/2040(3rd) 1913(4th)/1785/1530/1275(17th-20th)

Prize money for Grand Finals
100000/55000/35000/25000/15000
Prize money for World Cup
45000/25000/15000/10000/6000/3250/1250

Again, you get 1.4~1.8 times more prize money if you can proceed one round further, but not as many as ranking points.

jawien
12-20-2017, 08:40 PM
[...] out of 418 players 0 players played 11 events out of 12 in 2017, 3 played 10 events, 4 played 9 events, 8 players played 8 events. Among them only 3 Japanese players are top 20. And they used to participate a lot. You can count how many played 7 events, 6 events, 5 events (Grand Finals eligibility) and so on. [...]

If this is the real participation ability of players then, maybe I apologized too fast ... ; )

"8 players played 8 events". Well I hope ittf knows what is doing and the calendar allows actually to have a meaningful ranking.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 08:50 PM
If this is the real participation ability of players then, maybe I apologized too fast ... ; )

"8 players played 8 events". Well I hope ittf knows what is doing and the calendar allows actually to have a meaningful ranking.

A few of my friends are on the world tour, heck I even know 2 that went to the grand finals
Unfortunately playing 8 events is really difficult

Other than calendar clash, it is also the travel time/recovery time, funding/budget

The things is ITTF is trying be like Tennis, but TT players rely on domestic competition for income. Tennis rely on international competition for income.

International income in TT is peanuts - as it costs a handful just to be there.
I know few players that spend more than gain just for being at world tours (ticket/hotel for 1 player, 1 coach, 1 physio, and get 3000 dollar in return for making QF?? lol)

Yes, these are professionals, and they playing careers is limited to say 15 to 20 years.
They need to make more money than another other career (other than sports) and they need to be playing in events that makes them money
These guys are not charity members and give fans a good show for free (world tour is a freebie in return for ranking points, in return for seeding)

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 08:55 PM
Tony keeps on giving these examples where ma long has six events or seven events but not 8. He can't produce one where Ma Long has 8 and the system fails. I wonder why...

The system is not perfect and it might even fail on all fronts but it is better to try than to not do anything. And the fact that a player who was #3 under the old system is #1 under the new system is not the end of the world but some people just see issues all the time with anything the ITTF tries. I agree that there should be a bigger reward for winning, but the ITF also rates all the events not just a max number.

Because CNT Mens Team only budget on 6 events in 2017

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 09:09 PM
Because CNT Mens Team only budget on 6 events in 2017

National teams are not the only ones who sponsor players - clubs, equipment manufacturers and private sponsors also sponsor players. Or to play for CNT, you can only play on CNT budget?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 09:12 PM
Lets say we take someone that gets SF in 8 events:

Qatar: 6600USD
Japan: 6600USD
China: 6600USD
Aus: 11000USD
Austria: 6100USD
Germany:6100USD
India: 4200USD
Korea: 4400USD

These are the top 8 SF prize money: Total 51600USD

If each event you budget airticket for 2 people: 1000USD per ticket x 2 x 8 = 16000USD
accreditation fee for player and coach about 180USD each x 2 x 8 = 2880USD
Accommodation (aiming at 5 nights) about 200USD (double room per person sharing) x 2 x 5 x 8 = USD16000
Lets say there is no other costs, so total here is 34880 USD or 68% of the prize money.
I'm not even going to talk about TAX.....

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 09:15 PM
National teams are not the only ones who sponsor players - clubs, equipment manufacturers and private sponsors also sponsor players. Or to play for CNT, you can only play on CNT budget?

let me rephrase
CNT only chose to go to 6 tours
Now if CNT decides 6, the players can't go to a 7th

And back on budget - look at my calculation on how SF players can't even break even
My friends tell me international is only for seeding/ranking points, else they loose lots of money when playing world tour, they rather play clubs
I'm not making these up

If I have a kid that is good in TT, do you tell them to chase fame or chase finance, as they would need to look after they children one day.
Other than your few Chinese super stars - how many pros are well off?
other than your 1 per top country that can get endorsements - how many are well off?

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 09:20 PM
Lets say we take someone that gets SF in 8 events:

Qatar: 6600USD
Japan: 6600USD
China: 6600USD
Aus: 11000USD
Austria: 6100USD
Germany:6100USD
India: 4200USD
Korea: 4400USD

These are the top 8 SF prize money: Total 51600USD

If each event you budget airticket for 2 people: 1000USD per ticket x 2 x 8 = 16000USD
accreditation fee for player and coach about 180USD each x 2 x 8 = 2880USD
Accommodation (aiming at 4 nights) about 200USD (double room per person sharing) x 2 x 4 x 8 = USD12800
Lets say there is no other costs, so total here is 31680 USD or 61% of the prize money.
I'm not even going to talk about TAX.....

LEt's say I want to get more money for a tour event. I go to a sponsor. The sponsor says they will pay me more money if I can guarantee that top players are going to play at least 9 out of 10. The sponsor wants to see the ranking list. I tell him that I cannot guarantee that Zhang Jike and Timo Boll will play because they have do other things. The sponsor then doesn't want to raise the money for my event. What are my options?

Someone wrote this post on mytt. How do you respond:

http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=81291&PID=1009148&title=impact-of-new-ittf-ranking-system#1009148

Remember the fiasco at the Asia OlympicQualification for Rio?

The ITTF took the fans opinions to heart and forced all topplayers to take part - no exceptions. They came up with a 2-stage format. Whathappened? China took advantage (http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=75079&PID=928353&title=2016-ittfasian-olympic-qualification#928353) of a greyarea in the format and set such a "brilliant" example for the rest tofollow.

Those away from the action may not react as much, but thelocal fans in HK and those who traveled all the way from China were outraged.They bought tickets ahead of time(wasn't cheap, over US$120) for the 2nd-stagewhich fell on the weekend, expecting to see their idols only to learn they hadalready left for days.

Did you know how embarrassed the HKTTA was? Li Ching and KoLai Chak had to play clowns to entertain the few fans that stayed. Complaintsfrom fans who bought tickets made it on TV and the newspaper. At least one faneven went so far as to file a lawsuit against HKTTA and made his voice heard onthe hkttf.com.

All this wouldn't have happened if they had the NPL rankingsystem.

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 09:26 PM
The above story also happened in the USA last year. Both LSW and Ding Ning pulled out of world Cup and they knew it wouldn't impact their rankings. In America we got to see Miu Hirano but a larger crowd wanted to see CNT players. Thank God they made it to Canada this year, but what is your way of handling this problem since it doesn't affect the rankings of the players who decide they want to do something else and fans like me get disappointed?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-20-2017, 09:32 PM
Well, the problem of sponsors is not the players problem.
SF doesn't even break even, QF will make a huge lost.

Yes, my friends all have a monthly salary from sponsors
They get royalty from Butterfly for blade sold
They play in T2 and other Euro/Japanese clubs
But players are not charity people
ITTF must sort out prize money to get players there.
Forcing them with ranking imo won't make much differences - lets wait and see how many played more than 6 in 2018

jawien
12-20-2017, 09:44 PM
SF doesn't even break even, QF will make a huge lost. [...]
lets wait and see how many played more than 6 in 2018

Yeah, lets wait for what will happens in 2018 before this discussion gets overheated ...

The power houses of tt like China, Japan, Germany and others will probably have those 8 events calculated into the calendar, since I guess the ranking is important for the seeding in WTTC, Olympics?

And Tony's great insight is that World Tours do not work like Tennis tournaments, Slams etc. Table Tennis is a different story, a regular player earns the money in a club, whereas in Tennis I guess is just the opposite.

NextLevel
12-20-2017, 09:51 PM
Yeah, lets wait for what will happens in 2018 before this discussion gets overheated ...

The power houses of tt like China, Japan, Germany and others will probably have those 8 events calculated into the calendar, since I guess the ranking is important for the seeding in WTTC, Olympics?

And Tony's great insight is that World Tours do not work like Tennis tournaments, Slams etc. Table Tennis is a different story, a regular player earns the money in a club, whereas in Tennis I guess is just the opposite.

Yes but this ignores the fact that the same issues were in badminton as well until badminton also made its rankings more dynamic to support more player participation.

The other point is that sponsors do ask the things I ask when deciding how much they can give. It is easier to market or plan an event if you are sure the top players are coming or have a strong incentive to come.

It may not work but Tony is on record as believing that the ITTF cannot grow table tennis. He may be right but he has disqualified himself from positively evaluating any ITTF attempt to grow table tennis.

jawien
12-20-2017, 10:09 PM
[...]
It is easier to market or plan an event if you are sure the top players are coming or have a strong incentive to come.


Yes, I agree. There might be a new dynamic introduced into the system and maybe the prizes will grow too. Who knows. We were looking from the perspective of the current participation in the tournaments.


[...]
It may not work but Tony is on record as believing that the ITTF cannot grow table tennis. He may be right but he has disqualified himself from positively evaluating any ITTF attempt to grow table tennis.

No no lets not get overheated. Tony was looking on the new system from the perspective of a single player. Without the support of sponsors, your domestic organization participating in the Tour does not make financial sense. Tony's calculations are showing that quite firmly.

Will the sponsors be willing to pay so much more money to let other players to come more often? Will see.

drunix80
12-20-2017, 10:20 PM
Yes but this ignores the fact that the same issues were in badminton as well until badminton also made its rankings more dynamic to support more player participation.

The other point is that sponsors do ask the things I ask when deciding how much they can give. It is easier to market or plan an event if you are sure the top players are coming or have a strong incentive to come.

It may not work but Tony is on record as believing that the ITTF cannot grow table tennis. He may be right but he has disqualified himself from positively evaluating any ITTF attempt to grow table tennis.

Except for the fact badminton's prize money is far higher.

jawien
12-20-2017, 10:35 PM
Except for the fact badminton's prize money is far higher.

Yes, this is the most upsetting to see. Why not to have like Grand Slams in Tennis? China, Japan, Germany + "one floating" + WTTC. Make some brand or something. I'd rather see Ma Long, Dima or Fan 5 times a year in a Great tournaments, than gazillion times playing in front of empty halls ...

rainneverever
12-20-2017, 10:38 PM
http://www.ctta.cn/xhgg/qttz/2017/1214/163713.html
This is CTTA announcement last week on who will be sent to Hungary Open, 29 people.That's the way CNT wants to deal with the new rule, more players to play more events. For MS, there are FZD, WCQ, Liu Dingshuo, Xu Chenhao, Yu Ziyang, Xue Fei and on waiting list are Zheng Peifeng, Niu Guankai, Ma Te, Zhou Qihao, Yan Sheng, Song Xu, Sai Linwei.
However, all these players on waiting list will not be able to play as well as Xu Chenhao, because they do not have World ranking points (Dec ranking under new ranking system). WCQ and YuZiyang may not be able to play because they are ranked over 380+ in Dec under new ranking system (104 and 72 under current ranking system) and the entries limit is 290.
This is what I meant earlier, If higher ranked players want to play more tour, lower ranked players will not be able to play at all. This is common issue for developing young players, not limited to CNT. Sweden's Truls Moregard is ranked 166 under current system and 889 under new system this Dec. Most likely he will not be able to play any senior World Tour events in 2018. Under current system, new/young players can upset higher ranked players to accumulate ranking points quickly; under new system, firstly they do not have many chances to play. Secondly, they do not have bonus points beating higher ranked players.

Takkyu_wa_inochi
12-21-2017, 12:33 AM
There are too many competitions in TT. they should do less competitions, and on the other hand, increase the prize money.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 06:58 AM
It may not work but Tony is on record as believing that the ITTF cannot grow table tennis. He may be right but he has disqualified himself from positively evaluating any ITTF attempt to grow table tennis.

Of all the ITTF attempts to grow table tennis, how many have worked?
Should we start from 21 to 11 point change, or 38mm change?
and lets take out CTTA's influence (ITTF kindof forced CTTA to start Chinese table tennis college)

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 07:07 AM
Except for the fact badminton's prize money is far higher.

At the end of the day, other than your Chinese, Japanese and German, players wealth is a big problem
I am friends with a former internationals (ranked as high as top 20 before) and 20 years on today, they rely on coaching as income.
No funds left from playing days (not even enough for him to bond a house back then) - other than the reputation of being a good player - so can charge more per hour on coaching today.

Heck, I know few that became businessman and not perusing TT after playing, and the 13 old year son has never touch TT too.

Maybe being a TT pro (and surviving) needs to be something that ITTF and the likes of ITTF fanclubs (nextlevel) needs to consider. Or maybe fans don't care about what happen to players after they retire

Yeah, maybe I am a bit closer to these players than guys like nextlevel are, so I do have some personal emotions attached in viewing all these and I am happy to admit it.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 07:09 AM
http://www.ctta.cn/xhgg/qttz/2017/1214/163713.html
This is CTTA announcement last week on who will be sent to Hungary Open, 29 people.That's the way CNT wants to deal with the new rule, more players to play more events. For MS, there are FZD, WCQ, Liu Dingshuo, Xu Chenhao, Yu Ziyang, Xue Fei and on waiting list are Zheng Peifeng, Niu Guankai, Ma Te, Zhou Qihao, Yan Sheng, Song Xu, Sai Linwei.
However, all these players on waiting list will not be able to play as well as Xu Chenhao, because they do not have World ranking points (Dec ranking under new ranking system). WCQ and YuZiyang may not be able to play because they are ranked over 380+ in Dec under new ranking system (104 and 72 under current ranking system) and the entries limit is 290.
This is what I meant earlier, If higher ranked players want to play more tour, lower ranked players will not be able to play at all. This is common issue for developing young players, not limited to CNT. Sweden's Truls Moregard is ranked 166 under current system and 889 under new system this Dec. Most likely he will not be able to play any senior World Tour events in 2018. Under current system, new/young players can upset higher ranked players to accumulate ranking points quickly; under new system, firstly they do not have many chances to play. Secondly, they do not have bonus points beating higher ranked players.

I learnt something from you
Didn't know of the 380+ issue

Now this is silly.
Before junior points/U21 are all the same points as senior level
New system, the points are calculate seperatly

So for Truls, how can he accumulate enough points to participate on senior level?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 07:18 AM
Yes, this is the most upsetting to see. Why not to have like Grand Slams in Tennis? China, Japan, Germany + "one floating" + WTTC. Make some brand or something. I'd rather see Ma Long, Dima or Fan 5 times a year in a Great tournaments, than gazillion times playing in front of empty halls ...

I read some where before is that sponsors are not putting money down because of 1) empty halls 2)TT generally don't have TV coverage.

I guess you make a valid point - having your Ma Longs, Dimas and co doesn't equal to fulling up halls and host getting TV coverage (heck in fact ITTV some times locks certain region to view and half the time you see fans struggling to watch)

Taiwan has a very successful domestic TT culture in terms of sponsorship.
Imo this is the most successful of its kind in the world and it is kindof "private corporate" driven.

For example
Co-OP bank (My facebook photo profile is with Co-OP bank's head coach and top player Chuan Chih Yuan)
There is 5 coaches + 1 head coach
There is something like 30 players
There is something like 20 back up players

These people are on the bank's payroll
coaches/head coach needs to work x hours a day (just like any employee) in either office or table tennis hall (One of my friends there works 3 hours in the morning at the bank, and 4 hours afternoon with Taiwan's top cadets and juniors)

30 players - some current some former players
current players play full time on world tour/clubs etc
former players are still players or training partners
Same as coach - they need to commit to x hour a day to get the salary
Salary level is depending on how successful you are as a player - ie Chuan Chih Yuan being top 10 in the world gets a branch managers salary (until retirement as player - he can become coach/training partner and keep his salary)

20 back up players are mostly juniors/cadets who get funds on a monthly basis, of which it will increase with certain milestones, ie - QF final in WJTTC or SF final in WJTTC equals how much increase they get going forward

Co-OP is the biggest private funder in Taiwan

Cathay life currently have 3 coaches and 18 female players on its payroll (less players, but they have the best facility in Taiwan)
I'm afraid I signed a NDA with them, so I can't share too much

Then you get First bank team.
I had lunch with the 2 head coaches, but didn't really get too much info
I understand they work similar to Co-OP, just a smaller scale
Some successful players are like Liao Cheng Ting (U21 grand final winner 2016)

rainneverever
12-21-2017, 07:42 AM
The #250 under new system in Dec has ~1600 points. Once a young/new player gets within #250, it is safe to get entered in senior World Tour. So the goal is to get 1600 points.
Truls can play senior Challenge event but still has to pray that the event is not filled with top 800 players. The winner gets 900 points. Or he can play continental events (winner 1050~1800) and team events that world ranking may not be a must for entering; however, will the coach be brave enough to let him play in Team World Cup (200 per win) or Team WTTC (250 per win)? He is not one of the best in Sweden and it is not fair to let him play certain continental events when entries per association are limited. So I don't know the best solutions for Truls and most likely he will just play U21 next year.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 07:57 AM
The #250 under new system in Dec has ~1600 points. Once a young/new player gets within #250, it is safe to get entered in senior World Tour. So the goal is to get 1600 points.
Truls can play senior Challenge event but still has to pray that the event is not filled with top 800 players. The winner gets 900 points. Or he can play continental events (winner 1050~1800) and team events that world ranking may not be a must for entering; however, will the coach be brave enough to let him play in Team World Cup (200 per win) or Team WTTC (250 per win)? He is not one of the best in Sweden and it is not fair to let him play certain continental events when entries per association are limited. So I don't know the best solutions for Truls and most likely he will just play U21 next year.

But U21 points has no influence to senior points.....

So meaning his only method is to take part in many challenge series and get 1600+ points to take part in other world tour series....

rainneverever
12-21-2017, 08:07 AM
Wait, there is a problem of the 1600 points goal. Say all higher ranked player keep playing World Tour intensively to maintain their ranking points and more young/new players get 1600 points by playing challenge series, then they may not be able to enter World Tour as there may be 30 players of 1600 points and 1600 points no longer #250...
So set the goal of 2000 points (#200) or even higher and pray everyday that higher ranked players will not attend the event you want to play.


But U21 points has no influence to senior points.....

So meaning his only method is to take part in many challenge series and get 1600+ points to take part in other world tour series....

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 08:14 AM
Wait, there is a problem of the 1600 points goal. Say all higher ranked player keep playing World Tour intensively to maintain their ranking points and more young/new players get 1600 points by playing challenge series, then they may not be able to enter World Tour as there may be 30 players of 1600 points and 1600 points no longer #250...
So set the goal of 2000 points (#200) or even higher and pray everyday that higher ranked players will not attend the event you want to play.


The more this thread goes on, the more silly the new system is

Astorix
12-21-2017, 08:16 AM
One solution is, the events all have to get much bigger and longer

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 08:17 AM
One solution is, the events all have to get much bigger and longer

I've seen events getting small and smaller (not wanting too many participant) due to costs

jawien
12-21-2017, 12:51 PM
I read some where before is that sponsors are not putting money down because of 1) empty halls 2)TT generally don't have TV coverage.
I guess you make a valid point - having your Ma Longs, Dimas and co doesn't equal to fulling up halls [...]


Well usually they do attract some crowd, depends where the tournament is hosted : ) My point was (and it shows how many aspects of tt this new ranking touches) that in order to attract sponsors maybe it would be good to have some kind of brand created. Like tennis has those 4 Grand slams tournaments within the year. Why not to have like 3 or 4 major tournaments that everybody would be waiting for? Such events would have a bigger chance to make it to the tv or broader audience. But this is just as a side note.


[...] For example
Co-OP bank (My facebook photo profile is with Co-OP bank's head coach and top player Chuan Chih Yuan)


Thanks for sharing how tt functions in Taiwan, I guess some similar system is in the Japan from what I heard. In Poland it was the case before the '89, when the economy was centralized (govern by the state). Now it is just a regular sponsorship of different companies.

I talked recently to the Women's first league team sponsor. Even on this level the sponsor said frankly that he is doing this not because of the advertising, but the sentiment he has for the sport. The guy owning the company was a player before. So yeah, tt although very popular among people to play, really has a problem to be a professional sport with big publicity.

NextLevel
12-21-2017, 01:31 PM
Well usually they do attract some crowd, depends where the tournament is hosted : ) My point was (and it shows how many aspects of tt this new ranking touches) that in order to attract sponsors maybe it would be good to have some kind of brand created. Like tennis has those 4 Grand slams tournaments within the year. Why not to have like 3 or 4 major tournaments that everybody would be waiting for? Such events would have a bigger chance to make it to the tv or broader audience. But this is just as a side note.



Thanks for sharing how tt functions in Taiwan, I guess some similar system is in the Japan from what I heard. In Poland it was the case before the '89, when the economy was centralized (govern by the state). Now it is just a regular sponsorship of different companies.

I talked recently to the Women's first league team sponsor. Even on this level the sponsor said frankly that he is doing this not because of the advertising, but the sentiment he has for the sport. The guy owning the company was a player before. So yeah, tt although very popular among people to play, really has a problem to be a professional sport with big publicity.

TT is a popular sport with nerds and nerds are some of the richest people in the world. There is frankly no good reason it should be doing better from a financial sustenance view. IT just needs the right approach to be found.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 02:14 PM
Well usually they do attract some crowd, depends where the tournament is hosted : ) My point was (and it shows how many aspects of tt this new ranking touches) that in order to attract sponsors maybe it would be good to have some kind of brand created. Like tennis has those 4 Grand slams tournaments within the year. Why not to have like 3 or 4 major tournaments that everybody would be waiting for? Such events would have a bigger chance to make it to the tv or broader audience. But this is just as a side note.



Thanks for sharing how tt functions in Taiwan, I guess some similar system is in the Japan from what I heard. In Poland it was the case before the '89, when the economy was centralized (govern by the state). Now it is just a regular sponsorship of different companies.

I talked recently to the Women's first league team sponsor. Even on this level the sponsor said frankly that he is doing this not because of the advertising, but the sentiment he has for the sport. The guy owning the company was a player before. So yeah, tt although very popular among people to play, really has a problem to be a professional sport with big publicity.

Cathay Group chairman is fond of TT, so that is why about 10 years ago he founded the Cathay life table tennis team
Some of the top players include Chen Szu Yu.
If there is another chairman who likes other sports, I doubt they would ever have a TT team
heck, all 18 players get paid to play, and accommodation, education is provided - this is more complete than your top sports schools in China. The pay for a junior WJTTC player for example isn't bad either

Sadly you don't really have any rich people in many countries that funds TT
talk USA for example, all the big hype of Gates and Buffett, but not much really occurred from that other than just a match or two

Another rich Taiwanese businessman - Terry Guo, chairman of foxconn has been sponsoring Chuang Chih Yuan's training centre - Chih Yuan Table Tennis Centre a good amount per year for 10 years

But how about USA? How about UK
How about other Euro countries?
There isn't a lot of money, so if competition price money is not there, then the future doesn't look good

Atas Newton
12-21-2017, 02:16 PM
Yes, this is the most upsetting to see. Why not to have like Grand Slams in Tennis? China, Japan, Germany + "one floating" + WTTC. Make some brand or something. I'd rather see Ma Long, Dima or Fan 5 times a year in a Great tournaments, than gazillion times playing in front of empty halls ...
this is the biggest issue for me. Ding Ning won the World Championship and Liu Shiwen nearly became a record 5 times World Cup champion only for people to say they "hardly played" the whole year. Yes, they didn't come to many foreign "Opens" because, frankly, who cares about the smaller tournaments. The hype is alive for a week or two then everyone moves on, whereas the Major winners make history.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 02:22 PM
this is the biggest issue for me. Ding Ning won the World Championship and Liu Shiwen nearly became a record 5 times World Cup champion only for people to say they "hardly played" the whole year. Yes, they didn't come to many foreign "Opens" because, frankly, who cares about the smaller tournaments. The hype is alive for a week or two then everyone moves on, whereas the Major winners make history.

I believe one of the motives of "platinum" series naming is to make these "big" events
But look at the prize money
the 1st round of Australian open in Tennis fetches AUD50000 (38500 USD), your big ITTF Platinum winners gets USD24000 only
1st round in Aus open is nothing - there is 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th round then you get your QF/SF/Final
QF fetches AUD440000 (338000 USD)

Atas Newton
12-21-2017, 02:31 PM
I learnt something from you
Didn't know of the 380+ issue

Now this is silly.
Before junior points/U21 are all the same points as senior level
New system, the points are calculate seperatly

So for Truls, how can he accumulate enough points to participate on senior level?
wildcard participation, presumably? I don't know really.

Atas Newton
12-21-2017, 02:35 PM
I believe one of the motives of "platinum" series naming is to make these "big" events
But look at the prize money
heck the 1st round of Australian open in Tennis fetches AUD50000 (38500 USD), heck your big ITTF Platinum winners gets USD24000 only
1st round in Aus open is nothing - there is 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th round then you get your QF/SF/Final
QF fetches AUD440000 (338000 USD)
there's a ridiculous amount of money in tennis. Sometimes I look up a player I've never heard of and their lifetime winnings (by the age 22 or something like that) is hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of the most rich sports on the planet, which is why I think it's a bit unfair to compare TT to tennis. Badminton, on the other hand...

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 02:42 PM
Badminton seems to be listening to players:

http://www.thehindu.com/sport/other-sports/Saina-calls-on-BWF-to-hike-Super-Series-prize-money/article17018257.ece
Here a player talks about league has more prize money that tournament

http://www.firstpost.com/sports/bwf-announces-new-tournament-structure-with-booming-prize-money-3343626.html
Here you see BWF is aiming to get USD1m+ price money x 4 times a year

level 1 event - 1 x USD1.5m
level 2 events - 3 x USD1m
level 3 events - 5 x USD700k
level 4 events - 7 x USD350k
level 5 events - 11 x USD150k


Currently our Platinum Qatar, China, Japan, Austria, Germany are USD210k~USD220k

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 02:43 PM
there's a ridiculous amount of money in tennis. Sometimes I look up a player I've never heard of and their lifetime winnings (by the age 22 or something like that) is hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of the most rich sports on the planet, which is why I think it's a bit unfair to compare TT to tennis. Badminton, on the other hand...

haha, i just did

any ways, you say don't compare to tennis
but parents of potential tt kids will compare

NextLevel
12-21-2017, 02:43 PM
Cathay Group chairman is fond of TT, so that is why about 10 years ago he founded the Cathay life table tennis team
Some of the top players include Chen Szu Yu.
If there is another chairman who likes other sports, I doubt they would ever have a TT team
heck, all 18 players get paid to play, and accommodation, education is provided - this is more complete than your top sports schools in China. The pay for a junior WJTTC player for example isn't bad either

Sadly you don't really have any rich people in many countries that funds TT
talk USA for example, all the big hype of Gates and Buffett, but not much really occurred from that other than just a match or two

Another rich Taiwanese businessman - Terry Guo, chairman of foxconn has been sponsoring Chuang Chih Yuan's training centre - Chih Yuan Table Tennis Centre a good amount per year for 10 years

But how about USA? How about UK
How about other Euro countries?
There isn't a lot of money, so if competition price money is not there, then the future doesn't look good

Give USA time. The USATT has good management and good things are happening. We are hosting Vets next year and will put in a World Championship bid, not sure for which event. If they can penetrate the US market, that will be more than anything out there. There are enough millionaires sponsoring TT in America, the best clubs are sponsored in Silicon Valley and then there is Will Shortz (NYT Times Puzzle Columnist) sponsoring a great club in Westchester. A professional model needs the TT players to be held accountable as professionals. It is not a one-way street.

NextLevel
12-21-2017, 02:49 PM
Badminton seems to be listening to players:

http://www.thehindu.com/sport/other-sports/Saina-calls-on-BWF-to-hike-Super-Series-prize-money/article17018257.ece
Here a player talks about league has more prize money that tournament

http://www.firstpost.com/sports/bwf-announces-new-tournament-structure-with-booming-prize-money-3343626.html
Here you see BWF is aiming to get USD1m+ price money x 4 times a year

level 1 event - 1 x USD1.5m
level 2 events - 3 x USD1m
level 3 events - 5 x USD700k
level 4 events - 7 x USD350k
level 5 events - 11 x USD150k


Currently our Platinum Qatar, China, Japan, Austria, Germany are USD210k~USD220k

They increased their money when they built out a professional tour with a ratings system that they could sell that required players to play more events to keep their rankings. There is no other sport where someone can play the schedule that Zhang Jike played last year and remain top 10 in the world.

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 03:09 PM
Give USA time. The USATT has good management and good things are happening. We are hosting Vets next year and will put in a World Championship bid, not sure for which event. If they can penetrate the US market, that will be more than anything out there. There are enough millionaires sponsoring TT in America, the best clubs are sponsored in Silicon Valley and then there is Will Shortz (NYT Times Puzzle Columnist) sponsoring a great club in Westchester. A professional model needs the TT players to be held accountable as professionals. It is not a one-way street.

how many players in the USA are earning an income as a player?

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 03:10 PM
They increased their money when they built out a professional tour with a ratings system that they could sell that required players to play more events to keep their rankings. There is no other sport where someone can play the schedule that Zhang Jike played last year and remain top 10 in the world.

then we better hope your claims of selling is there and some one sells that to ITTF's sponsors

Even before the increase, BWF was still higher than ITTF

jawien
12-21-2017, 03:13 PM
They increased their money when they built out a professional tour with a ratings system that they could sell that required players to play more events to keep their rankings. There is no other sport where someone can play the schedule that Zhang Jike played last year and remain top 10 in the world.

If the new ranking system is somehow connected to the possible deals with sponsors, why not. I guess we'll have to wait.

When it comes to the "brand" thing the t2 APAC was a nice example. I don't know if they had a financial success but the prize pool money was like 2 mln $ - I know 6 events ... Still it was a nice format showing how to make tt attractive for the spectators. And at the same time they created a "brand" !! The Ittf's Platinum thing is hardly recognizable ...

You are too fast guys ... It's hard to quote you or respond to you ; )

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 03:16 PM
If the new ranking system is somehow connected to the possible deals with sponsors, why not. I guess we'll have to wait.

When it comes to the "brand" thing the t2 APAC was a nice example. I don't know if they had a financial success but the prize pool money was like 2 mln $ - I know 6 events ... Still it was a nice format showing how to make tt attractive for the spectators. And at the same time they created a "brand" !! The Ittf's Platinum thing is hardly recognizable ...

You are too fast guys ... It's hard to quote you or respond to you ; )

I'm on holiday from my 3 jobs
I think I posted more these 2 days than the whole year :p

NextLevel
12-21-2017, 03:21 PM
how many players in the USA are earning an income as a player?

You mean vs a coach? There isn't a professional league in the U.S. Smaller sports have supported professionals so it is partly about getting the model right. But I think that given that more kids from wealthy backgrounds are playing, it ia a matter of time. If chess csn supoort professionals there is no clear reason TT can't.

jawien
12-21-2017, 03:25 PM
I'm on holiday from my 3 jobs
I think I posted more these 2 days than the whole year :p

Ha ha, the post were really fast sometimes ; ) Well good I personally gained a great insight into how tt machine works. In Poland I guess the situation for Men league is quite good compared to the past. There is a separate legal entity taking care of the "Superliga" and they were able to contract many great players like Chun Ting Wong or Paul Drinkhall ... so there are sponsors and many Polish players are strictly professional.

[Edit] not talking about the overall system and coaching. Probably another discussion.

rainneverever
12-21-2017, 03:49 PM
USA and Canada are together bidding for 2020 WTTTC in San Jose at Silicon Valley. I think they will make it because ITTF really wants the market in North America (WTTC has never been held in NA). The other bidders are Korean and Russian cities.

T2 is founded and funded by Frank Ji, the CEO of Seamaster and biggest sponsor of ITTF now. In his interview, he said basically he threw money on T2 the first year and hoped it will work out and make profits later on. Has T2 made profits this year at all? By selling broadcast or selling player cards? I guess he will continue to pour money for a while.

jawien
12-21-2017, 05:13 PM
[...] Has T2 made profits this year at all? By selling broadcast or selling player cards?

I hope they do, because the format was really good. And they didn't have to worry about the rankings ... they just invited players, right? : )

Xylit
12-21-2017, 06:04 PM
What is that seamaster company doing? Any homepage link? I am just able to find a brand for watches with that name. Also cannot find anything except ittf results by googling Frank Ji.

rainneverever
12-21-2017, 07:03 PM
Search Frank Ji and T2 then and you will find more news.
http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/polishing-diamond-that-is-ping-pong

His Chinese name is Ji Wenyuan. Seamaster is a shipbroking company. I think the name sea master tells that.
http://www.seamasterltd.com/web4.html

He has a good TT collection at home. ITTF has a video about him.

https://youtu.be/S4d89HYLZLw

Astorix
12-21-2017, 07:23 PM
Search Frank Ji and T2 then and you will find more news.
http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/polishing-diamond-that-is-ping-pong

His Chinese name is Ji Wenyuan. Seamaster is a shipbroking company. I think the name sea master tells that.
http://www.seamasterltd.com/web4.html

He has a good TT collection at home. ITTF has a video about him.

https://youtu.be/S4d89HYLZLw


i like this guy.

jawien
12-21-2017, 09:37 PM
Search Frank Ji and T2 then and you will find more news.
http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/polishing-diamond-that-is-ping-pong

Great Rainneverever! Thanks for the video! Guys seriously I don't know how we gonna make it back to the main topic of the thread from here, but ... who cares it's interesting.

So there are several things I like about Frank Ji too:
- he has this 200 something blades collection!!! ... hmm ... a dream of every tt "nerd" ; )
- plays the sport and genuinely likes it. The presentation of his tt rooms show how keen he is.
- has a passion and vision for the sport.
- wants to develop the sport, create a "style" - a "brand" I would say. The T2 projects shows it very well I think.

Few things he said seem quite important:
- the current market value for tt is low now - so it's also true on the global level - sport being sponsored by rich businessmen who has a sentiment for the sport ; )
- t2 is a platform to build "a style" (4:34 if I understood correctly) "a commercial" value - good direction in my opinion.
- I was reluctant about the ttx thing, but now I see his point, to build some kind of culture around the core tt, I think this could be a surest way to make "tt" more available - specially to younger people ...
- tt has to be more "fashionable" - yes - somehow tt has to gain this modern character.

Ok so 2017 Frank increased his tt investments in the World Tour events. Quite a coincident with a new ranking system ... ? So basically do you agree we have an answer? That this new participation ensuring ranking system is related with the Seamaster investments?

To summarize, regardless of what reservations we have about the new system, I think Frank Ji seems to be a great "asset" for the sport. He has really nice concepts and is fully convinced that there is a real potential in the game.

[Side note] Little similar situation to our's current PZTS CEO who also is a businessman. He started sponsoring one club and now is in charge of the whole institution. They've made really good changes to how the matches are conducted now. Multi ball games are a norm. T2 had it nicer tough because they had kids to handle the balls to the player not the umpire, also towels for the players like in Tennis - good ... anyway ... : )

Tony's Table Tennis
12-21-2017, 10:20 PM
You mean vs a coach? There isn't a professional league in the U.S. Smaller sports have supported professionals so it is partly about getting the model right. But I think that given that more kids from wealthy backgrounds are playing, it ia a matter of time. If chess csn supoort professionals there is no clear reason TT can't.

No, only talking players
and from I observed from many countries, one does not need to play in pro league for earnings from a club
Some teams will pay players to take part with them

WorkerBee
12-22-2017, 02:12 PM
This discussion about the future of Table Tennis is wonderful. Is there some way to separate it out of the thread on Dima, which is related, but quite different?

jawien
12-22-2017, 03:15 PM
This discussion about the future of Table Tennis is wonderful. Is there some way to separate it out of the thread on Dima, which is related, but quite different?

Sure, but no need to. We got into this because Dima #1 -> because new system -> probably because sponsors -> maybe Frank Ji.
But this is it. I don't think we'll continue this side topic. J.

rainneverever
12-22-2017, 08:29 PM
I don't think Ji has that much influence on ITTF's policy making. The first edition of the new ranking systemwas made at least a year ago. So it must had been planned for a while.
This year we see new leagues like T2 and India's Ultimate TT. Japan plans a new league with high prize next year. I think TT market is growing gradually. Hopefully players can earn more from these leagues. But ITTF still needs to find ways to increase prize money for World Tour to help players make ends meet.

ping fun
12-22-2017, 08:34 PM
I don't think Ji has that much influence on ITTF's policy making. The first edition of the new ranking systemwas made at least a year ago. So it must had been planned for a while.
This year we see new leagues like T2 and India's Ultimate TT. Japan plans a new league with high prize next year. I think TT market is growing gradually. Hopefully players can earn more from these leagues. But ITTF still needs to find ways to increase prize money for World Tour to help players make ends meet.

you give good infos ... bravo good girl

Tony's Table Tennis
12-23-2017, 08:50 PM
I thought the indian league was good
T2 was too long (says a player that played in it)
Again these are signs that domestic competition is more welcomed over international

I guess WTTC/WTTTC and OG are the main events.
We saw what happened to WC with CNT pulling out last year
and we all saw how the world top 100 sees the world tour (majority play in less than half of them)