Dimitrij Ovtcharov The New World Number 1!

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2016
4,021
4,580
19,083
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
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,288
17,752
44,329
Read 17 reviews
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.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2016
4,021
4,580
19,083
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...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sanavasaraja
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
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.
 
Last edited:
says Any body knows when will be the next Asia Pacific...
says Any body knows when will be the next Asia Pacific...
Member
Sep 2016
336
162
503
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping fun
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2016
1,659
1,140
5,311
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.
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,764
2,607
8,135
Read 8 reviews
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.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2016
1,659
1,140
5,311
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.
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,764
2,607
8,135
Read 8 reviews
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NextLevel
This user has no status.
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 :(
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2016
1,659
1,140
5,311
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.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,260
6,230
15,303
Read 3 reviews
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
 
says The sticky bit is stuck.
says The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
Jan 2017
2,764
2,607
8,135
Read 8 reviews
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NextLevel
Top