Dimitrij Ovtcharov unhappy with new ITTF World Ranking system!

[Suga D]

I'm not sure I see the problem with this? Players who win more games should be ranked higher? Yes Ma Long is the best player in the world, but if he only plays two or three world tour comps every year, I'm not sure he's proving it? If someone is playing every tour event and playing consistently well, why shouldn't he be seen as one of the worlds best? He's proving it tournament after tournament.

If these big guns want to remain where they are, they need to play more games. That can only be a good thing?? If world ranking means that much to Timo Boll, he'll have to play some more games!! Not sure I see the issue with professional table tennis players being encouraged to play more games!?


Sent from myPhone using Tapatalk

Well that might even make sense to a degree from that point of view.
But let me show the other side of the story: we shouldn't forget Timo doesn't want to penetrate his body that much anymore due to his age and risking injuries. We could see this already happen in the last couple of years.
So this would mean his ranking would drop if he plays less often. But his actual playing level most likely wouldn't drop by that much.
So then his ranking wouldn't be accurate to his level at all. Whereas young players who use every Chance they get to play at every possible tournament would get a better rating and hence ranking even if they never make it past last sixteen/ last thirtytwo.
So the World ranking will nowhere be accurate to playing level anymore, 'cause who can seriously think that the ranking would define the playing level? Hard to imagine somebody would seriously want this!
[EMOJI6]

 

[zoomtt]

As I mentioned before, only the best 8 tournaments are considered (that is, the 8 highest amount of points earned in a tournament). Considering that every player usually competes in the Olympics, World Championships, European/African Championships.. those already count as 3 tournaments, whose points last for 4, 2 and 2 years respectively.

What does it mean? That having good results in those tournaments will still keep them with a good amount of points (they have a yearly reduction though). They would only need to play 5 more tournaments to opt for the maximum number of tournaments which count for the current ranking. In fact, that's exactly the amount of ITTF World Tour events that players must compete on to qualify for the ITTF Grand Finals.

Therefore, I would say that top players in a descending level could just participate in the main events and keep their ranking.

 

[Sali]

I do not know what is dima compaining, besides that he usually complains on everything. One thing is for sure, current system does not correspond to international stage. Dima should know best this is international system, not national one. So does not matter how good Boll play in Germany, if he does not compete in international stage, then he does not have int. ranking level.
In my opinion the changes are to force best players compete more. This is great for the spectators, because top players will play more. Boll is great example, he plays very occasionaly and he is still 12 player, a was 10 not long ago. Also who has seen Tang Peng playing high level lately or Chen Chien An. Not mentioning Liang Jingkun who played only 2 tournaments one he was down in preliminary stage and the other lost in 1/4 and now he is to 50.

 

[NextLevel]

Well that might even make sense to a degree from that point of view.
But let me show the other side of the story: we shouldn't forget Timo doesn't want to penetrate his body that much anymore due to his age and risking injuries. We could see this already happen in the last couple of years.
So this would mean his ranking would drop if he plays less often. But his actual playing level most likely wouldn't drop by that much.
So then his ranking wouldn't be accurate to his level at all. Whereas young players who use every Chance they get to play at every possible tournament would get a better rating and hence ranking even if they never make it past last sixteen/ last thirtytwo.
So the World ranking will nowhere be accurate to playing level anymore, 'cause who can seriously think that the ranking would define the playing level? Hard to imagine somebody would seriously want this!
[EMOJI6]

Someone told me that Timo has been injured for a long time and has always played injured, it's one of the hidden secrets of table tennis and a fact of life for many athletes, the degree it affects his play just changes based on how it affects his practice. In the end though, I think getting the best players to play more if they want to keep their rankings so a good thing. The only issue I have with it is whether the events play enough to support the increased participation as many players pay out of pocket to make these trips.

 

[NDH]

In the UK we have a nation ranking system which ultimately rewards people the more they play.

The results in a few people who play a lot of ranking tournaments, being ranked much higher than those who only play in 1 or 2 per year.

If the new system only takes into account your best 8 tournaments in a year, I think it's a great system. It will give people a chance to move up the rankings, and it'll incentivise the young hungry players to play more.

At the end of the day, if the Ma Long's and FZD's of the world only play 8 tournaments, but come 1st and 2nd in each, they'll still be number 1 and 2.

Regarding tennis, the money aspect has been said already - But look at Federer.

He's come back after 12 months of not playing much and was ranked outside the top 10. He then went on to win the Australian Open and last week won Indian Wells, so is very quickly moving back up the rankings.

I don't see why it shouldn't be any different in Table Tennis. If you don't play - Why should your ranking be protected?

I love the old guys (Samsonov, Boll etc), but if the new ranking system gives more youngsters a chance, it's a great thing.

 

[Suga D]

As I mentioned before, only the best 8 tournaments are considered (that is, the 8 highest amount of points earned in a tournament). Considering that every player usually competes in the Olympics, World Championships, European/African Championships.. those already count as 3 tournaments, whose points last for 4, 2 and 2 years respectively.

What does it mean? That having good results in those tournaments will still keep them with a good amount of points (they have a yearly reduction though). They would only need to play 5 more tournaments to opt for the maximum number of tournaments which count for the current ranking. In fact, that's exactly the amount of ITTF World Tour events that players must compete on to qualify for the ITTF Grand Finals.

Therefore, I would say that top players in a descending level could just participate in the main events and keep their ranking.

Even though this is true, i don´t think this new system is an improvement to the old system (Dear Mr. Saive, could you pls take over ASAP?) I´ve already explained why i think so, but i´m gonna give a more detailed explanation below.
Afaik Timo is already playing close to his limits and still is trying to find the right balance between his personal challenges and not hurting his body by overdoing practice and competition. He has been already focussing on the bigger events, and didn´t participate in the Pro Tour a lot lately. So i guess his few appearances won´t be enough to keep his ranking.
Certainly it´s a natural process, due to aging, but i think an international rating and Ranking system is mainly to be able to translate and compare playing Levels, which IMHO is less accurate with the new ranking system.

Someone told me that Timo has been injured for a long time and has always played injured, it's one of the hidden secrets of table tennis and a fact of life for many athletes, the degree it affects his play just changes based on how it affects his practice. In the end though, I think getting the best players to play more if they want to keep their rankings so a good thing. The only issue I have with it is whether the events play enough to support the increased participation as many players pay out of pocket to make these trips.

Increasing participation can ofc only be welcomed, but i think Timo´s already playing at his Limit, so before things start getting unhealthy he´ll most likely reduce his participations even more.
BTW: You have stated an excellent point. Players are sometimes already earning less in some tournaments than they are spending. So this definitely needs to change. So probably the whole marketing might have to change.

 

[NDH]

Increasing participation can ofc only be welcomed, but i think Timo´s already playing at his Limit, so before things start getting unhealthy he´ll most likely reduce his participations even more.
BTW: You have stated an excellent point. Players are sometimes already earning less in some tournaments than they are spending. So this definitely needs to change. So probably the whole marketing might have to change.

Hey Suga D - I agree with your points regarding Timo (and all the other older players), but we shouldn't be nostalgic for the older guys - If Timo (or anyone else) can't play in the tournaments due to injury/age/managing their work load - Why should they be awarded a ranking based in historical performances?

They could still enter a tournament and win (like Federer in Australia), it's just that they wouldn't have the high ranking they have become accustomed to.

 

[Suga D]

Hey Suga D - I agree with your points regarding Timo (and all the other older players), but we shouldn't be nostalgic for the older guys - If Timo (or anyone else) can't play in the tournaments due to injury/age/managing their work load - Why should they be awarded a ranking based in historical performances?

They could still enter a tournament and win (like Federer in Australia), it's just that they wouldn't have the high ranking they have become accustomed to.

That makes totally sense, but if a Ranking system doesn't express an international comparable Ranking what is the whole sense of an international Ranking system? I think it makes the Ranking ad absurdum or better worded this leads to an absurdity IMHO.

 

[Xylit]

As I mentioned before, only the best 8 tournaments are considered (that is, the 8 highest amount of points earned in a tournament). Considering that every player usually competes in the Olympics, World Championships, European/African Championships.. those already count as 3 tournaments, whose points last for 4, 2 and 2 years respectively.

What does it mean? That having good results in those tournaments will still keep them with a good amount of points (they have a yearly reduction though). They would only need to play 5 more tournaments to opt for the maximum number of tournaments which count for the current ranking. In fact, that's exactly the amount of ITTF World Tour events that players must compete on to qualify for the ITTF Grand Finals.

Therefore, I would say that top players in a descending level could just participate in the main events and keep their ranking.

Regardless of what has been said already, zoomtt's explanation does not sound too bad for me. Not sure whether it is an improvement and a necessary change but it won't be as bad as predicted by some of you. And we should not only have a look at Timo Boll I think it is fair to say that you should prove your world ranking from time to time. If you can't participate in a few big events every year then it is only fair if you are not ranked too high imo.

 

[ttmonster]

I think its a change in philosophy and like any change its difficult to accept. We have to agree whether International Ranking should stand for "true playing level" or "the playing level displayed in the recent olympic level with emphasis to pro tours" . ITTF is trying to improve the quality of the current pro tours and want to push top players to participate. Any sport in today's day and age favors youth , thats the very nature of sports , the federers, the timos are exceptions. And you cannot / should not make up a system based on exception.

You can never absolutely measure true playing level, unless the person participates. How can you measure something as fleeting as form , if due to whatever reason you cannot get a recent evidence of that.

I might be the best table tennis player there is, but if I only play in my basement , I cannot expect ITTF to put me in the top of the international rankings , can I ?

Lets just say pacing oneself and protecting oneself is a different way to approach the sport , we could definitely ask that with the recent changes ITTF should introduce wild cards , I don't know if the concept is there in table tennis already to introduce such atheletes directly into the main draw .

That makes totally sense, but if a Ranking system doesn't express an international comparable Ranking what is the whole sense of an international Ranking system? I think it makes the Ranking ad absurdum or better worded this leads to an absurdity IMHO.

 

[NDH]

That makes totally sense, but if a Ranking system doesn't express an international comparable Ranking what is the whole sense of an international Ranking system? I think it makes the Ranking ad absurdum or better worded this leads to an absurdity IMHO.

I think it comes down to how you look at the ranking system. Does it:

1. Show the true ranking of players "ability" worldwide?
2. Show the current "form" of players worldwide?

If Federer stops playing for 2 years, his "form" is likely to be very poor, and therefore he'll be "ranked" accordingly.

However, you could still argue that his ability is still very high, and on par with the top players - As shown in Australia recently.

So yes, there will be players who are arguably much better than their ranking (typically the older players who play less tournaments) - But as previously said.... They only need to play 8 to keep a decent ranking anyway.

 

[NextLevel]

That makes totally sense, but if a Ranking system doesn't express an international comparable Ranking what is the whole sense of an international Ranking system? I think it makes the Ranking ad absurdum or better worded this leads to an absurdity IMHO.

I think that rewarding particpation is an important goal if building a professional tour is the goal.

 

[Loopadoop]

I'm not sure I see the problem with this? Players who win more games should be ranked higher? Yes Ma Long is the best player in the world, but if he only plays two or three world tour comps every year, I'm not sure he's proving it? If someone is playing every tour event and playing consistently well, why shouldn't he be seen as one of the worlds best? He's proving it tournament after tournament.

If these big guns want to remain where they are, they need to play more games. That can only be a good thing?? If world ranking means that much to Timo Boll, he'll have to play some more games!! Not sure I see the issue with professional table tennis players being encouraged to play more games!?

Agree +1

The ranking should reflect the performance on the pro tour with a minimum participation requirement for validation.

 

[Suga D]

Just like to add one thing though.

The ITTF wants to improve the value of their pro tour, but only very few players can win and earn so much to make a proper living, since there isn't as much cheddar in TT as it is in tennis. Only very few will be able to rely only on their prize money.
I don't know bout other countries, but in Germany the players get most of their loot from participation in TTBL not from ProTours. So in the end it will be the clubs who give TT-players most of their salary but get bent over and screwed, 'cause their players are either at a ProTour or recovering from injury that they got from ProTour participation.
Of course i've exaggerated a bit, but that's where this could lead to, 'cause less players could see a possible future for themselves trying to make a living from TT and only relying on ProTour prize money. I think the ITTF shouldn't put hassle to the clubs that give quite a few players an outcome with their income.

 

[NextLevel]

Just like to add one thing though.

The ITTF wants to improve the value of their pro tour, but only very few players can win and earn so much to make a proper living, since there isn't as much cheddar in TT as it is in tennis. Only very few will be able to rely only on their prize money.
I don't know bout other countries, but in Germany the players get most of their loot from participation in TTBL not from ProTours. So in the end it will be the clubs who give TT-players most of their salary but get bent over and screwed, 'cause their players are either at a ProTour or recovering from injury that they got from ProTour participation.
Of course i've exaggerated a bit, but that's where this could lead to

I think this is where ITTF needs to think through working with the leagues to make this work. That said, growing the Pro Tour which is the visible international product should also be in the League's interests.

 

[Suga D]

Here's my message to the ITTF and their chair T.Weikert:



[Emoji12]

Of course you're right again. And maybe i just see all of this a bit too negative. I guess in the end we shall see.....

 

[NextLevel]

Hey Suga D - I agree with your points regarding Timo (and all the other older players), but we shouldn't be nostalgic for the older guys - If Timo (or anyone else) can't play in the tournaments due to injury/age/managing their work load - Why should they be awarded a ranking based in historical performances?

They could still enter a tournament and win (like Federer in Australia), it's just that they wouldn't have the high ranking they have become accustomed to.

One can actually debate, despite Timo's obvious ability, whether he would do as well without the seeding he gets from his ranking if he had to play tougher players earlier almost every time he had to enter a tournament.

 

[NextLevel]

Here's my message to the ITTF and their chair T.Weikert:

View attachment 12586

[Emoji12]

Of course you're right again. And maybe i just see all of this a bit too negative. I guess in the end we shall see.....

Your points are important and correct. And after all, this is from the same people who created that TTX. That says a lot.

 

[NDH]

One can actually debate, despite Timo's obvious ability, whether he would do as well without the seeding he gets from his ranking if he had to play tougher players earlier almost every time he had to enter a tournament.

Absolutely, that was part of my point which wasn't emphasised, that supported the "legends" shouldn't have an easy ride argument.

 

[Filip]

Timo just won a tournament organized in Germany, partly as a warm-up tournament for the WTTC. And he won 3-0 against Gauzy in the semi finals, and 3-0 against Ovtcharov in the finals, so he still has the level, also when his seeding would be different.

I don't think they should mak the ranking so dependent on participation, but yes, maybe a bit more then now. Also, you will not get any more points when you win against Ma Long or against i don't know, Franziska, when it is in the same round, only how far you get in the tournament matters. That is not good, I think