This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Seeding needs to be accurate
now our beloved world tour seeding is based on participation [...]
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.
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.
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.
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
The major problem of the new ranking system is the difference between results is way too small.
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.
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.
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.
TT becoming ridiculous
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.
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
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