Ittf stupiiiiiiiiiid ranking

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
DN did not have WR in Nov 2017 due to 4-month inactivity. Her hidden ranking points were higher than the actual #2 Chen Meng. She played Swedish Open and ended up 2nd place losing to Chen Xingtong thus her Dec 2017 ranking is #3. Chen Xingtong jumped from #33 to #10 in Dec 2017 because she beat much higher ranked ZYL and DN in Swedish Open.
If the purpose of ranking is for seeding, why not ask first what is the purpose for seeding? Why not randomize all players? A good ranking system can predict match results right with higher chance. We call #33 Chen Xingtong beating #2 DN last Nov a big upset, this year we will expect upset caused by #21 DN If she can revenge #10 Chen Xingtong.


you are getting overworked with semantics and missing the point. You are cherry picking words as carl said, yes i did say rankings are for seedings but u seem to forget that i said that rankings/ratings are an just indication of a player's value. I ve been saying that like for ages. All the other jibberish about ding ning causing an upset against chen xintong are absolutely hilarious.

you are getting to excited with ratings./rankings numbers and titles like ''the worlds no1''. all of these are crap and meaningless when the match starts . Since you like statistics so much do a research on how many times the worlds no1 in ranking actually proved on the table in grand slam tours or world team competitions that he is indeed no1.

Rankings obviously have multipurpose but do I really need to analyze the obvious? You are so stuck in your own point of view that every different POV seems weird

If you dont know the purpose of seeding ill be happy to explain it thoroughly

p.s. please define ''upset'' without numbers, im sure it would begin an interesting conversation
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
To clarify my point even more. as NL said rankings give us a depiction of who is the best in a period of time. In 2011 ML had an amazing streak of wins in pro tours but failed to deliver in important matches. The worlds best is always correlated/connected to a person's own criteria and preferences, thats why we have so many arguements about ma long and zhang jike.

If one could ask (during their prime, lets say 2010-2014) LGL who would he pick for team competitions he would pick ma long hands down and zjk for singles . Some attributes and performances cannot be measured accurately with ratings, LSW beat hirano with ease in asian teams, yet LSW hasnt delivered in singles.

ding ning on the other hand has 3 world champs but lost to ito, fukuhara, hirano throughout her career and they both lost to feng tianwei only for LSW to blame in that match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping fun
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Apr 2012
422
123
794
u cant achieve perfect. define perfect first please...how do you perceive it? perfect,at least for me, at this situation is keeping everyone happy and a fair rating system for all. which is impossible. the current rating system is better than the previous, at least that is my opinion

There is no viable reason for ittf to do that kind of tests , they wanted more active play to make TT more enjoyable, the reason they did it is to force players to attend pro tours which is a good thing for viewers and more viewers are attracting more sponsors.

Oh, so ittf meeting was like "it is not viable to test it out. So we'll just go out and implement the whole thing." Very nice.

Of course I do understand that perfection is not possible in anything not did I mean perfection literally. But that shouldn't be an excuse to not try harder or hard enough. I'm sure being a player and enthusiast you know that as well. If we don't push the ittf and settle for less, then this is what we'll get.
Cheers!
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Apr 2012
422
123
794
Ranking should not be a measure of participation or the money ittf is making from you this year. That is called % attendance I think in common parlance and the latter is WWF/WWE. Djokovic incident is a quirk. Even in tennis, arguments (from prominent players) have been made to change the system. There's a provision of protected ranking for injured players, which is how the previous ITTF system used to work (name will be removed from ranking list for all practical purposes but you can mount your comeback from your previous level).

All TT experts say TT is more like chess+boxing, yet we want to ape tennis wrt the ranking system. IMHO, TT will never draw spectators like tennis because the raw physicality is not on display long enough and the subtleties are too hard to catch even for ordinary coaches.

If the majority feels this system is good then we'll just have to live with it. Probably dictionaries will come out with new meaning for the word 'ranking'.

Sorry if I hurt anybody. End of rant. Thanks for reading.
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
Oh, so ittf meeting was like "it is not viable to test it out. So we'll just go out and implement the whole thing." Very nice.

Of course I do understand that perfection is not possible in anything not did I mean perfection literally. But that shouldn't be an excuse to not try harder or hard enough. I'm sure being a player and enthusiast you know that as well. If we don't push the ittf and settle for less, then this is what we'll get.
Cheers!

we cannot push them to do anything mate dont have illusions :p the quality on the videos is still bad and we have been complaining like for ages. I know its disappointing but thats the way it is, the plastic ball was also a radical decision and of course no one was asked not even the players. It was done purely for the money
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
ML was ranked #1 in Dec 2010 and dropped to #5 in Apr 2011 because of lack of attendance of World Tours (WH, ZJK and M Lin attended 4 more tour events than ML before 2011 WTTC.) As a result, ML was #5 seed of 2011 WTTC and WH, Timo Boll, ZJK, M Lin were #1-4 seeds. ML was drawn to M Lin's quarter and WH's half because of the seeding/ranking.

Several points to make here:1, under old ranking system, ranking will drop due to less attendance because bonus points from winning an event were valid for only 12 months. 2, ranking affects seeding and sometimes it matters. If WH were #1 and ML were #2, ML would avoid WH before final but as #5 he could only pray for luck. 3. In 2011 WTTC, ranking would predict #5 ML lost to #1 WH in SF and it was not an upset in this regard. #3 ZJK beat #2 Timo Boll in SF and #1 WH in final, which was not predicted by ranking. But again a good ranking system predicts over 2/3 matches correct. It is not fortune telling.


To clarify my point even more. as NL said rankings give us a depiction of who is the best in a period of time. In 2011 ML had an amazing streak of wins in pro tours but failed to deliver in important matches. The worlds best is always correlated/connected to a person's own criteria and preferences, thats why we have so many arguements about ma long and zhang jike.

If one could ask (during their prime, lets say 2010-2014) LGL who would he pick for team competitions he would pick ma long hands down and zjk for singles . Some attributes and performances cannot be measured accurately with ratings, LSW beat hirano with ease in asian teams, yet LSW hasnt delivered in singles.

ding ning on the other hand has 3 world champs but lost to ito, fukuhara, hirano throughout her career and they both lost to feng tianwei only for LSW to blame in that match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanavasaraja
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
ML was ranked #1 in Dec 2010 and dropped to #5 in Apr 2011 because of lack of attendance of World Tours (WH, ZJK and M Lin attended 4 more tour events than ML before 2011 WTTC.) As a result, ML was #5 seed of 2011 WTTC and WH, Timo Boll, ZJK, M Lin were #1-4 seeds. ML was drawn to M Lin's quarter and WH's half because of the seeding/ranking.

Several points to make here:1, under old ranking system, ranking will drop due to less attendance because bonus points from winning an event were valid for only 12 months. 2, ranking affects seeding and sometimes it matters. If WH were #1 and ML were #2, ML would avoid WH before final but as #5 he could only pray for luck. 3. In 2011 WTTC, ranking would predict #5 ML lost to #1 WH in SF and it was not an upset in this regard. #3 ZJK beat #2 Timo Boll in SF and #1 WH in final, which was not predicted by ranking. But again a good ranking system predicts over 2/3 matches correct. It is not fortune telling.

provide us with a better ranking system then. U talked about december 2010 to may 2011(p.s. ma long was injured thats why he didnt attend i guess thats en excuse for ZJK only but not for ma long hahahaha j/k), i was talking for the whole 2011 where ma long was undefeated for like 40-50 straight matches after the world champs and lost to zjk in slovenian open 2012. no5 or no1 it wouldnt matter, ma long's performance was inadequate and as wr 5 he had easier job than zjk reaching the finals. thats why rankings do not matter when the match starts

zjk won joo sae huyk,wang liqin,timo boll and that other great north korean penholder i dont remember his name. the most ''difficult'' opponent ma long had was ma lin, which ma long is extremely comfortable with, and they both faced wang hao...

so this is also a good example of ''bad'' seeding with a good draw eventually. many players have won medals or performed very well because the draw was convinient although their ranking was low. kreanga for example had an exquisit performance in 2003 but didnt face a chinese in his road to the semifinal yet he clinched a bronze medal. did he deserve it ? well of course not cause his ranking was like 7-15 at the time.jesus ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping fun
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
Just add one thing. For 2011 WTTC, the main draw had 64+32+16+8+4+2+1=127 matches. Although the old ranking predicted final wrong and 1 SF wrong, it predicted 102 matches correct out of 127 (80%). Good enough.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
Coach Li Xiaodong said CNT reduced ML's attendance on World Tour before 2011 WTTC on purpose, to give ML pressure. “The team did not let him play some tournaments. His ranking dropped. In this way, he was pushed to play well in the tournament he could attend. Otherwise, he would have no ranking points. So at that time his ranking dropped to #5.”It sounds ridiculous and it never happened before or later but it did happen.
ML played two World Tour in Feb 2011 so it is not injury issue at all.

Some people think the old ranking system favors senior players who have accumulated a lot of rating points (based on whom they beat and to whom they lost) as the rating points do not expire. I don't think this is a real issue but it is possible to adjust the duration of rating points (say valid for 3 years, or only matches against active players count). The new ranking system is just the part of bonus points of the old system. No incentive for beating higher ranked players.
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
Just add one thing. For 2011 WTTC, the main draw had 64+32+16+8+4+2+1=127 matches. Although the old ranking predicted final wrong and 1 SF wrong, it predicted 102 matches correct out of 127 (80%). Good enough.

so...ur telling me that in the next world champ the current world ranking system wont predict accurately enough. Like predictions are the goal here? seriously? ittf's motive was crystal clear, force big players to compete more often. so far pro tours were a joke and no one was watching till the quarter finals. The point allocation system maybe needs some adjustments but we will see that in the future

Its funny how you set your own criteria about what makes a good ranking system yet reality is totally different. the damn ranking system and how fair or unfair it is , is not the point !!! here we discovered american again
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Apr 2012
422
123
794
My only gripe is they didn't test the new system at lower levels and take player feedback to hopefully weed out the low hanging fruit so that we all don't waste time arguing on forums like this. :D

We need evolution, not revolution. Going all out all the time as pointed by our friends earlier (like ball changes etc) is not good.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
Dima withdrew Hungarian Open this Jan because winning this tournament will not change his ranking points. The new WR#1 simply withdrew the first ITTF tour event of 2018 while ITTF wants more top players to play World Tour. Ironic!
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,271
17,733
44,273
Read 17 reviews
Dima withdrew Hungarian Open this Jan because winning this tournament will not change his ranking points. The new WR#1 simply withdrew the first ITTF tour event of 2018 while ITTF wants more top players to play World Tour. Ironic!


People could also miss event because of injury too - wouldn't that be ironic?

I can't wait until it rains in Southern California so we can all bask in the irony...

Timo Boll played a full schedule for the first time in many years... that is really ironic...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping fun
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
My only gripe is they didn't test the new system at lower levels and take player feedback to hopefully weed out the low hanging fruit so that we all don't waste time arguing on forums like this. :D

We need evolution, not revolution. Going all out all the time as pointed by our friends earlier (like ball changes etc) is not good.

ball changed for some companies to make money thats the single truth. and this change in rankig system is also for tt to have better TV quality product in pro tours and commercialize the sport more. its not about evolution or revolution, it was always about money
 
  • Like
Reactions: strangeloop
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Oct 2010
221
75
381
Dima withdrew Hungarian Open this Jan because winning this tournament will not change his ranking points. The new WR#1 simply withdrew the first ITTF tour event of 2018 while ITTF wants more top players to play World Tour. Ironic!

For the Hungarian Open the cancellation deadline is 14-Jan at 1200 local time. If a player withdraws after this time they will receive a penalty. Zero points will be allocated for that event in the player's top 8 results, and will remain for 12 months. There are consequences for late cancellation, so let's wait and see how many withdraw after noon on 14-Jan.

penalty.JPG
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,271
17,733
44,273
Read 17 reviews
For the Hungarian Open the cancellation deadline is 14-Jan at 1200 local time. If a player withdraws after this time they will receive a penalty. Zero points will be allocated for that event in the player's top 8 results, and will remain for 12 months. There are consequences for late cancellation, so let's wait and see how many withdraw after noon on 14-Jan.

View attachment 15108

TTGuru, could you please provide some commentary on why the rating points for the second place vs first place and semi finals vs second place etc, are so much closer together than they are in say, Tennis? It does seem to over reward participation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suga D and JST
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Oct 2010
221
75
381
TTGuru, could you please provide some commentary on why the rating points for the second place vs first place and semi finals vs second place etc, are so much closer together than they are in say, Tennis? It does seem to over reward participation.

Hi NextLevel, that's a good question. I imagine those decisions are made by the WR committee, which is displayed on page 11 of the WR regulations document here:
https://d3mjm6zw6cr45s.cloudfront.net/2016/07/World-Ranking-description-2018-final2.pdf

The system is in very early days, perhaps this will be addressed in future, but it's not up to me.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2016
1,024
1,960
3,016
For the Hungarian Open the cancellation deadline is 14-Jan at 1200 local time. If a player withdraws after this time they will receive a penalty. Zero points will be allocated for that event in the player's top 8 results, and will remain for 12 months. There are consequences for late cancellation, so let's wait and see how many withdraw after noon on 14-Jan.

Dima planned to play. Then he decided not to play because of the new ranking system.

Guy asks:
"Why have you decided not to play the Hungarian Open in january 2018?
Is it because of the new WR-system?

Dima responds:
"If i had not made WR #1, I would've played the Hungarian Open.

However, I have enough points, to remain WR #1 for to months now.

I will be on vacation untill january 7th and start an intense training period after that to be able to perform well at WTC, German and Qatar Open."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Simas
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Oct 2010
221
75
381
Dima planned to play. Then he decided not to play because of the new ranking system.

Guy asks:
"Why have you decided not to play the Hungarian Open in january 2018?
Is it because of the new WR-system?

Dima responds:
"If i had not made WR #1, I would've played the Hungarian Open.

However, I have enough points, to remain WR #1 for to months now.

I will be on vacation untill january 7th and start an intense training period after that to be able to perform well at WTC, German and Qatar Open."

Looks like Dima knows what he's talking about. He has done well to earn the no.1 spot and can now afford to take a break. Every other player below him has the ability to rise in the WR, Dima does not, and he has enough strong results to keep that position for a short time without competing. No other player can do that because no other player is ranked number one. Well done Dima, I would do the same if I were in his shoes.

dima-top8-jan18.JPG
 
Top