PDA

View Full Version : July World Rankings 2018



TableTennisDaily
07-01-2018, 09:23 PM
The July World Rankings have been released with some notable changes!

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/images/lingaoyuannumber32018.jpg
Lin Gaoyuan career high world ranking #3 - Photo via ITTF Flickr

The new world ranking structure is now in full effect. See for yourself in the latest world rankings. Ma Long drops to number 6, Timo moves back up to number 2, Lin Gaoyuan hits a career high of 3 and Fan Zhendong retains his world number 1 status!

Here's the top 30 list below:


MENS WORLD RANKING

01 (01) Fan Zhendong
02 (04) Timo Boll
03 (05) Lin Gaoyuan
04 (03) Dimitrij Ovtcharov
05 (06) Xu Xin
06 (02) Ma Long
07 (08) Lee Sang Su
08 (10) Tomokazu Harimoto
09 (07) Wong Chun Ting
10 (11) Hugo Calderano
11 (12) Simon Gauzy
12 (09) Koki Niwa
13 (13) Jun Mizutani
14 (15) Chuang Chih Yuan
15 (14) Kenta Matsudaira
16 (16) Marcos Freitas
17 (19) Jonathan Groth
18 (20) Mattias Karlsson
19 (21) Ruwen Filus
20 (22) Quadri Aruna
21 (17) Omar Assar
22 (18) Kristian Karlsson
23 (28) Jeong Sangeun
24 (25) Patrick Franziska
25 (26) Vladimir Samsonov
26 (23) Jin Ueda
26 (30) Maharu Yoshimura
28 (23) Lim Jonghoon (117357)
29 (33) Kou Lei
30 (34) Jang Woojin



WOMENS WORLD RANKING

01 (02) Zhu Yuling
02 (03) Wang Manyu
03 (01) Chen Meng
04 (04) Kasumi Ishikawa
05 (06) Mima Ito
06 (05) Liu Shiwen
07 (10) Chen Xingtong
08 (07) Miu Hirano
09 (08) Cheng I-Ching
10 (09) Feng Tianwei
11 (13) Doo Hoi Kem
12 (17) Gu Yuting
13 (15) Suh Hyowon SUH Hyowon
14 (14) Hitomi Sato
15 (16) Hina Hayata
16 (18) Sofia Polcanova
17 (12) Ding Ning
18 (20) Lee Ho Ching
18 (20) Miyu Kato
20 (22) Saki Shibata
21 (19) Elizabeta Samara
22 (23) Zhang Mo
23 (24) Chen Szu Yu
24 (27) Honoka Hashimoto
25 (30) Matilda Ekholm
26 (31) Li Qian
27 (34) Yui Hamamoto
28 (36) Bernadette Szocs
29 (11) Yingsha Sun
30 (25) Jihee Jeon


A huge congratulations to Lin Gaoyuan who reaches a career high world ranking of 3!

What do you think of the July World Rankings? Leave your comments below.

trumpet_guy
07-01-2018, 09:50 PM
I think you have a typo in the Women's #2: Should be Wang Manyu

TableTennisDaily
07-01-2018, 09:52 PM
I think you have a typo in the Women's #2: Should be Wang Manyu

Typo, updated :)

ILoveTT
07-01-2018, 09:52 PM
Very close to a non chinese player being number 1 in the womens cat

ronz91
07-02-2018, 04:40 PM
how much do these rankings even count these days

TTHopeful
07-02-2018, 05:19 PM
how much do these rankings even count these days

Good point. I'm not seeing any regularity atm. Im not sure if thats a good or bad thing

sderyke2002
07-02-2018, 07:14 PM
Does anyone know of a site on the Internet that has an historical list of the number 1 players in the world as each one succeeded the other in turn?

Thanks in advance to who ever can point me the right direction.

vik2000
07-02-2018, 07:36 PM
I have time taking these rankings seriously. I know it's a tricky thing to establish a set of standard with which to rank players, but seriously when some players with higher ranking have never beaten a player with lower rankings, the ranking becomes somewhat of a joke.

Baal
07-02-2018, 07:59 PM
Doesn't really correspond to the eye test.

cfagyal
07-02-2018, 08:10 PM
The new rankings system is doing exactly what it is intended to do. It is rewarding players who play, and punishing players who don't. It is more of a "who has played the best over the past year in ITTF events" and ranking those players accordingly.

The old system, like any ELO based rating system rewarded you for wins, punished you for losses, but didn't take into account participation, and so players once they got to a certain level, could play very few events, but maintain their high seeding. They had no risk of any detriment to their world ranking. This meant players could play a few events each year, yet still maintain their top seeding. This is what the ITTF wanted to get rid of, and it has done so very effectively.

Ding Ning is a key example of how the new system is punishing lack of participation. She only played in 1 event from the WTTC last May to the end of the year, and that was in November in Sweden. As a result she only has 6 results in the timeframe taken into account for the July ratings which is why she has dropped further in the ratings. She would now actually have to go through qualification rounds at a large event if the top 16 players are all in attendance, as she's down to #17. If she plays enough events her rating will rise, if she doesn't it will continue to fall as her WTTC win last year is going to fall off the rankings soon (Next month I think) and that is 3000 points.

Takkyu_wa_inochi
07-02-2018, 08:18 PM
poor Ding Ning and poor Zhang Jike...

NextLevel
07-02-2018, 08:30 PM
The new rankings system is doing exactly what it is intended to do. It is rewarding players who play, and punishing players who don't. It is more of a "who has played the best over the past year in ITTF events" and ranking those players accordingly.

The old system, like any ELO based rating system rewarded you for wins, punished you for losses, but didn't take into account participation, and so players once they got to a certain level, could play very few events, but maintain their high seeding. They had no risk of any detriment to their world ranking. This meant players could play a few events each year, yet still maintain their top seeding. This is what the ITTF wanted to get rid of, and it has done so very effectively.

Ding Ning is a key example of how the new system is punishing lack of participation. She only played in 1 event from the WTTC last May to the end of the year, and that was in November in Sweden. As a result she only has 6 results in the timeframe taken into account for the July ratings which is why she has dropped further in the ratings. She would now actually have to go through qualification rounds at a large event if the top 16 players are all in attendance, as she's down to #17. If she plays enough events her rating will rise, if she doesn't it will continue to fall as her WTTC win last year is going to fall off the rankings soon (Next month I think) and that is 3000 points.

I believe the drop off(or amortization) of the WTTC results is why she and Ma Long have fallen.

cfagyal
07-02-2018, 08:40 PM
They haven't dropped yet. They are both still getting full points for them. But not ITTF results from June of last year dropped off, so Ma Long lost 1350 rating points because his result from the China Open last year is no longer part of his rating. His win in the 2017 Japan Open was replaced with a QF result in the 2018 Japan open so he lost almost 1000 points there as well.

It appears WTTC results stay on the ratings longer than regular ITTF tour events which are relevant for a year. WTTC rating points last for 2 years (according to https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2017/11/New-ITTF-World-Ranking.pdf those rating points last until the next time that event is held)

Takkyu_wa_inochi
07-03-2018, 04:21 AM
Sofia Polcanova better ranked than Ding Ning, and what was the result of their last match ???

enough said !!!

langel
07-03-2018, 05:23 AM
Sofia Polcanova better ranked than Ding Ning, and what was the result of their last match ???

enough said !!!

Ma Long better ranked than Tomokazu Harimoto, and what was the result of their last match?

:cool:

Come on, this ranking system is better than ever.

Table Tennis Reborn
07-03-2018, 08:26 AM
Hugo breaks the top 10, this has made me happy

TT Guru
07-03-2018, 04:17 PM
Does anyone know of a site on the Internet that has an historical list of the number 1 players in the world as each one succeeded the other in turn?

Thanks in advance to who ever can point me the right direction.

ITTF will have this and much more before the end of 2018. It's being developed already so we don't have to wait too much longer. :D

ronz91
07-05-2018, 04:48 PM
The new rankings system is doing exactly what it is intended to do. It is rewarding players who play, and punishing players who don't. It is more of a "who has played the best over the past year in ITTF events" and ranking those players accordingly.

The old system, like any ELO based rating system rewarded you for wins, punished you for losses, but didn't take into account participation, and so players once they got to a certain level, could play very few events, but maintain their high seeding. They had no risk of any detriment to their world ranking. This meant players could play a few events each year, yet still maintain their top seeding. This is what the ITTF wanted to get rid of, and it has done so very effectively.

Ding Ning is a key example of how the new system is punishing lack of participation. She only played in 1 event from the WTTC last May to the end of the year, and that was in November in Sweden. As a result she only has 6 results in the timeframe taken into account for the July ratings which is why she has dropped further in the ratings. She would now actually have to go through qualification rounds at a large event if the top 16 players are all in attendance, as she's down to #17. If she plays enough events her rating will rise, if she doesn't it will continue to fall as her WTTC win last year is going to fall off the rankings soon (Next month I think) and that is 3000 points.

I dont see the point of that. seeding is meant to keep strong players from playing each other in the early rounds so as to get strong matches in the later stages. If a player is strong enough to win big tournaments, why the need to play smaller tournaments.

ronz91
07-05-2018, 04:52 PM
Vladis ranking makes me sad but hes been on the slide recently

NextLevel
07-05-2018, 05:20 PM
I dont see the point of that. seeding is meant to keep strong players from playing each other in the early rounds so as to get strong matches in the later stages. If a player is strong enough to win big tournaments, why the need to play smaller tournaments.

The point is that seeding perfectly based on strength creates no ranking incentive for people to play to demonstrate their playing strength. Seeding in part based on recent results means that some players will be forced to play smaller tournaments to keep their ratings up and that some players will be forced to risk being upset by wild cards etc. Perfect seeding has it's dark side too from a spectator interest viewpoint.

As long as your view is balanced and you make your preferences clear, then you can see why others may disagree.

cfagyal
07-05-2018, 05:41 PM
I dont see the point of that. seeding is meant to keep strong players from playing each other in the early rounds so as to get strong matches in the later stages. If a player is strong enough to win big tournaments, why the need to play smaller tournaments.

We aren't talking about "smaller" events. We are talking about ITTF World Tour Platinum events and World Tour events. They don't need to play challenger events to maintain their ranking, nor do they even need to play all of the world tour events. If they played all the platinum events (6) and a couple (2) world tour events they'd have the requisite 8 events to maintain world ranking points. But playing the WTTC and 1 other event during the year isn't adequate, and shouldn't be. There are provisions for long injury absences, and in the case of women, pregnancy for example. But just taking 6 months off with no real legitimate reason isn't acceptable anymore.

alas26
08-09-2018, 06:04 PM
Where can I find information on how the world ranking system changed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk