PAW ranking system 2012 - MensTennisForums.com

View Poll Results: What ranking system dou you want to have next year?
same as now (4GS + 9xATP1000 + 5 x best of the rest) 4 16.00%
4GS + 8 best of ATP1000 + 6 x best of rest) 11 44.00%
4GS + 14 best 8 32.00%
other (specify) 2 8.00%
I don't care 0 0%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-04-2011, 08:07 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
hallso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,674
                     
Question PAW ranking system 2012

please take a vote
hallso is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-05-2011, 12:20 AM
Registered User
 
coolfish1103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,653
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Other: 18 best tournaments.

Code:
Titles   

DTT(D) : 2012 Nice & Eastbourne, Olympics Bronze, 2013 Indian Wells w/supertec
PAW    : 2012 Atlanta
Suicide: 2011 Barcelona*, 2012 U.S. Open*, WTF*, 2013 Gstaad, Winston-Salem*
TT(S)  : 2011 Szczecin CH, 2013 Miami & Stuttgart
TT(D)  : 2011 Eastbourne w/Blarghman, Pozoblanco CH w/MuriloBrasil, Genova CH w/ESimp, Szczecin CH w/Dexter,
         2012 Newport w/chowdaheads25, 2013 Memphis & Stuttgart w/Blarghman
FITD   : 2011 Kuala Lumpur, 2012 Kitzbühel, 2013/14 Monte Carlo
coolfish1103 is offline  
post #3 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-05-2011, 03:59 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 56°N 102°E
Posts: 3,285
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolfish1103 View Post
Other: 18 best tournaments.
Half of tournaments is considered
Even better 24 best - 2/3 of tournaments is considered
purtov45 is offline  
post #4 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-05-2011, 02:36 PM
Registered User
 
Cava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 38
Posts: 3,224
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

I voted 4 + 14.
I don't really see much difference between this option and 18 best tournaments though.

TT Singles 62 <> TT Doubles 101 <> PAW 30 <> Suicide 26 <> DTT (W: 2012 AUS OPEN)
Cava is offline  
post #5 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-05-2011, 11:42 PM
Registered User
 
coolfish1103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,653
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cava View Post
I voted 4 + 14.
I don't really see much difference between this option and 18 best tournaments though.
It allows new players not to be penalized for not playing for part of the year they are missing. It also allows some good picking players who were on extended break to be leveraged with some additional points, but not to the point where it will affect rankings severely (cause what's replaceable is obviously not going to be 1k points tournament except Monte Carlo).

Code:
Titles   

DTT(D) : 2012 Nice & Eastbourne, Olympics Bronze, 2013 Indian Wells w/supertec
PAW    : 2012 Atlanta
Suicide: 2011 Barcelona*, 2012 U.S. Open*, WTF*, 2013 Gstaad, Winston-Salem*
TT(S)  : 2011 Szczecin CH, 2013 Miami & Stuttgart
TT(D)  : 2011 Eastbourne w/Blarghman, Pozoblanco CH w/MuriloBrasil, Genova CH w/ESimp, Szczecin CH w/Dexter,
         2012 Newport w/chowdaheads25, 2013 Memphis & Stuttgart w/Blarghman
FITD   : 2011 Kuala Lumpur, 2012 Kitzbühel, 2013/14 Monte Carlo
coolfish1103 is offline  
post #6 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-06-2011, 05:13 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 56°N 102°E
Posts: 3,285
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cava View Post
I voted 4 + 14.
I don't really see much difference between this option and 18 best tournaments though.
In what difference?
1) same as now: 4+9+5 : The weak result in GS or ATP1000 (in particular, skip of tournament) is not compensated.
2) 4+8+6 : One weak result in TOP1000 is compensated by good result in 500 or 250.
3) 4+14 : All weak results in TOP1000 are compensated.
4) coolfish1103 : 18 : All weak results in GS and TOP1000 are compensated.

The main choice between (1) and (4).
(2) differs little from (1), (3) differs little from (4).
Whether not so?
purtov45 is offline  
post #7 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-07-2011, 12:54 PM
Registered User
 
Cava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 38
Posts: 3,224
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Obviously I know the difference. My point being 4+14 or 18 best are both better than the current.

Coolfish comments further makes me believe the current ranking system needs to change. I'd really like to hear why people think 4+9+5 or 4+8+6 is a good system. Just because that's how ATP does it? This is PAW people

TT Singles 62 <> TT Doubles 101 <> PAW 30 <> Suicide 26 <> DTT (W: 2012 AUS OPEN)
Cava is offline  
post #8 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-07-2011, 04:17 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
hallso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,674
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

but it 'lives' thanks to ATP
hallso is offline  
post #9 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-07-2011, 07:12 PM
Vault Hunter
 
Aenea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mad Max Land
Posts: 6,521
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by hallso View Post
but it 'lives' thanks to ATP
true that.

From PAW rules

Quote:
The PAW Ranking System closely mirrors the ATP Ranking System.
I am a bit surprised that managers are suggesting big changes to PAW Rules/Ranking System. People seem to be forgetting PAW is a game created to follow ATP organization - tournaments, rules, ranking. I am for a ranking that if not exactly the same like the ATP RS then very close to it.

When I'm good, I'm very good...but when I'm bad, I'm better
Aenea is offline  
post #10 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-08-2011, 04:26 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 56°N 102°E
Posts: 3,285
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenea
I am for a ranking that if not exactly the same like the ATP RS then very close to it.
Let's look at a difference between item 1 and 2.
Item 2: All tournaments, except for the last in Paris, the same as earlier, with 6 other tournaments instead of 5.
Only after Paris: subtraction MIN(worst of ATP1000; 6th of ATP500/250; BNP Paribas Masters).
IMO, unjustified complication. Or big changes (item 4), or without changes (item 1).
But for not clear reason the majority for a item 2

PAW: #94(15 nov 2010) --> #71(7 feb 2011)
purtov45 is offline  
post #11 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-08-2011, 11:44 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
hallso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,674
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

You are not right. At every moment, in PAW rankings, last 9 ATP1000 would be included in the calculations.
The best 8 of 9 from last 52 weeks, not only from year-to-date. So before Paris, the tournament from the previous year would be counted.
Situation you mentioned would happen just in race.

I'm for the 2nd option because:
- everyone can play in each tournament, no matter what they ranking is
- nowadays access to the internet is so simple, that even if you travel, are on holiday etc., you can send your picks i.e.via mobile, what takes just few minutes
- I prefer this "8 of 9" change for some really 'critical' situations, when you go to the middle of Sahara or Amazonia and can't reach signal for whole week, then you can miss one ATP1000 without penalty
hallso is offline  
post #12 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-08-2011, 02:02 PM
Registered User
 
Cava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 38
Posts: 3,224
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenea View Post
I am a bit surprised that managers are suggesting big changes to PAW Rules/Ranking System. People seem to be forgetting PAW is a game created to follow ATP organization - tournaments, rules, ranking. I am for a ranking that if not exactly the same like the ATP RS then very close to it.
I would guess that most players do not understand how the rankings work. I've played one full year and am just now understanding.

This game is modeled after ATP. The big difference is that ATP players cannot play every single tournament like we can in PAW. That is why ATP tailors the ranking system so that people only play 1/2 the available tournaments.

So I think it just comes down to how often you want people to play. For me, I like to play every week. Therefore, I like a ranking system that rewards playing a lot.

TT Singles 62 <> TT Doubles 101 <> PAW 30 <> Suicide 26 <> DTT (W: 2012 AUS OPEN)
Cava is offline  
post #13 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-08-2011, 03:32 PM
Registered User
 
coolfish1103's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,653
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenea View Post
I am a bit surprised that managers are suggesting big changes to PAW Rules/Ranking System. People seem to be forgetting PAW is a game created to follow ATP organization - tournaments, rules, ranking. I am for a ranking that if not exactly the same like the ATP RS then very close to it.
I believe it's just a vote that goes through once a year.

It doesn't mirror ATP enough because we do not limit the max amount of players who can play in each tournament and all rankings do is to determine qualifications to WTF. If we do limit the draws, then I guess the rankings can stay exactly the same as ATP because top players will be able to force lower players out of tournaments even if they miss a tournament or two.

Anyhow, I don't think that's going to happen cause I don't think we want to do PAWs for CHs, just throwing random ideas out about how the ranking isn't really the case claimed.

Code:
Titles   

DTT(D) : 2012 Nice & Eastbourne, Olympics Bronze, 2013 Indian Wells w/supertec
PAW    : 2012 Atlanta
Suicide: 2011 Barcelona*, 2012 U.S. Open*, WTF*, 2013 Gstaad, Winston-Salem*
TT(S)  : 2011 Szczecin CH, 2013 Miami & Stuttgart
TT(D)  : 2011 Eastbourne w/Blarghman, Pozoblanco CH w/MuriloBrasil, Genova CH w/ESimp, Szczecin CH w/Dexter,
         2012 Newport w/chowdaheads25, 2013 Memphis & Stuttgart w/Blarghman
FITD   : 2011 Kuala Lumpur, 2012 Kitzbühel, 2013/14 Monte Carlo
coolfish1103 is offline  
post #14 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-08-2011, 03:41 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 56°N 102°E
Posts: 3,285
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

hallso,
thanks for an explanation, I have understood your argument. You have convinced me!

PAW: #94(15 nov 2010) --> #71(7 feb 2011)
purtov45 is offline  
post #15 of 15 (permalink) Old 12-11-2011, 03:45 AM
Registered User
 
jervisjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 5,083
                     
Re: PAW ranking system 2012

I picked option 3 only because I thought it would be easier for scores manager to update the rankings each week.

Otherwise, I am happy for either option 1 or option 2. Either case doesn't bother me much because I am so terrible at this game! Probably Option 2 as it mirrors the ATP.

Although saying that, it only mirrors for those ranked at the top. Lower ranked ATP players do not have to play all the GS or ATP1000 but I don't want to see the scoring for PAW to be too convoluted, much better to have it the same for all players.
jervisjames is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome