Who else besides me doesn't like the point system used to rank Tennis players. Federer won the US Open last?

Question

year, so he won't be able to add any points to his ranking by winning this year, that seems so absurd to me. It will take a year or so for him to re-gain his #1 ranking.

Answer 1

Did you bring up this concern when federer was #1?

I also didn't like the points system initially and wanted something like what you did i.e. a players points just get added on. But, think about it, if that was true, federer would have like 50k points by now and it would take a new comer atleast 8-10 years before he could reach that many points. So, the guy can entertain hopes of becoming #1 only towards the end of his career. Kind of silly, no?

The current points system is excellent. A 1 year window is enough to judge who should be #1.

Answer 2

I agree. It sucks. Just like Nadal has to win Roland Garros and all the tournaments he`s won, has to keep defending....boo

xo0oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  

Answer 3

Uhm agree and not. I do think you should have 2 defend because then people can't just have one awesome streak and get to number 1. I mean thats what the race is for, but I think no.1 should be based on consistancy not current form. BUT I do think it was riduclous that Nadal closed the gap on Fed by 600 points in Wimby. That seemed a pretty harsh penalty for coming runner up in 5 sets. Similary, it was silly how Djok could of over taken Nadal just because Nadal lost early in Rome- he lost way to many points for that, seems unfair.

So... I think the system needs changing so that you need to defend points, but there isn't such a big deffecit in point (esp for a runner up place). Maybe you need to get past a certain stage to defend all points, say quater finals. But that may make overtaking a bit hard. I'm not sure... until I come up with a better idea (which no doubt I will eventually) I can't really say it needs changing.  

Answer 4

i dont really have an opinion to it but i guess its kinda fair that you have to defend your points.

Answer 5

I don't like it either...but their really no other "fair" option.

Answer 6

Maybe they should drop the points of that tournament right before it starts.

Answer 7

I hate it. You see so many players out of place in terms of their rankings. For example, up until this summer, Marion Bartoli had early exits in just about every tournament she played since last year at Wimbledon, yet she stuck around the top 10, which made no sense. Another example would be Jankovic. She's had consistent results, but there is no way she should've been No. 1, unless she had won at least 1 grand slam.

It'll be interesting to see how the new points system works out for the mens game, with the new schedule change next year. It will probably suck too.  

Answer 8

Think of it this way: Federer was able to stay number one for most of this year, despite his struggles, due to his win at last year's US Open.  So basically after one year, his points have expired.  Now he needs to earn new points at this year's US Open.  As long as he does better this year than last year (in all of his tournaments), or if Nadal does worse, Federer will be back at number one.  It is abundantly clear that since June, Nadal has had a better year than Federer (of course Nadal could complain what took him so long to become number one), but because ranking points are an accumulation of one year's worth of play, Nadal had to wait.  This ranking system is extremely fair and has gotten it right.

Answer 9

I don't like the point system either.

Answer 10

I don't like the system either. I think it's stupid that a person can win a grand slam and not win any points. But there's nothing that we can do about it. Like John McEnroe said (using Nadal and Jankovic as examples), the ranking system is there for a reason but the fans decide who the #1 player is.  

Answer 11

Yeah it was the same with reguards to Venus Williams at Wimbledon this year. But I think the ranking work and every player is where they deserve to be when you consider a players form over the whole year.

Unfortunately that is the way it is. If Federer kept getting 1000 points for defending his Wimbledon and US Open titles he would still be #1 in the world 10 years after retiring!!!

That is why we have 'the race' which shows how many points players have got in just that year-It doesn't count for much but atleast it is recoignition for a players work during a year.