Potential impact of 2009 ranking system (top 100): CONCLUSION - journeymen beware! - MensTennisForums.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:06 PM Thread Starter
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,604
                     
Lightbulb Potential impact of 2009 ranking system (top 100): CONCLUSION - journeymen beware!

Post #25 - conclusion to the rankings "experiment."


Hopefully this will be of interest to some (certainly to me), and a useful tool for further discussion on this issue.


What I have done is to convert the points under the old ranking system into the NEW ranking system,
so we could observe the potential impact of these changes (notably, Federer would have finished 2008 ranked #3, for instance). NOTE - I have re-ranked the official 2008 year-end top 100...so, anyone finishing outside that list won't appear in this version (would be endless amounts of work...).

I don’t pretend to have a perfect vision of how the 2009 formula will work…there are several “rules” that need clarifying, such that if 5 of us were to compile a similar list, I think we’d all come up with a number of slightly different standings/points totals (although not so different that it would render this “experiment” meaningless).


Anyway, I have tried to mirror the 2009 formula as closely as possible, although, on the odd occasion, I have felt the need to deviate from it ever so slightly:

- I haven’t worked out World Team Cup points…purely because I don’t know the breakdown. At any rate, I think it only counts as a possible “250” result, and, given that many of the participants had other solid “250” results over the 2008 season, I think the difference in a few points totals would have been minimal.

- I have made a few “intelligent” guesses as to requisite challenger levels (e.g. $75,000)…again, any potential differences in points totals would be minimal (affecting only a few players within the top 55 anyway).


In trying to mirror the 2009 formula as closely as possible, I have:

- stuck to the “top 30” rule…this is one of the “rules” that I’m not alone in thinking needs clarification, to the point that if a player who finished year-end top 30 became unable to make the cut for a Masters event in the following year, how could he include that particular result in his ranking? You will notice that Ljubicic is one of the players who would have taken a hit because of this new rule (I gave him 0 pts for Madrid and Paris).

- converted results across the new “250,” “500” and “1,000” points levels. I took Monte Carlo out of the Masters “1000” bracket (under the new rules) and included it as a “500” result (where relevant), with a maximum 1000 pts on offer. Also, where a player won a lower-level event in 2008, which would have counted for more in 2009, I made the necessary adjustment (e.g. Almagro - Valencia). Also, I awarded “0 pointers” where a player would have failed to play the necessary number of equivalent “500” events, although I avoided the rule where one of the “500” events had to be played after the US Open.

Last edited by El Burro; 12-30-2008 at 05:16 PM.
Horatio Caine is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:07 PM Thread Starter
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,604
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Post #25 - conclusion to the rankings "experiment."

Code:
01  (01) Rafael Nadal (ESP)           11,915
02  (03) Novak Djokovic (SRB)          9,145   
03  (02) Roger Federer (SUI)           8,980
04  (04) Andy Murray (GBR)             5,735
05  (05) Nikolay Davydenko (RUS)       4,255 
06  (08) Andy Roddick (USA)            3,345
07  (06) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (FRA)      3,195
08  (09) Juan-Martin Del Potro (ARG)   3,040
09  (11) David Nalbandian (ARG)        2,720
10  (07) Gilles Simon (FRA)            2,647
11  (12) David Ferrer (ESP)            2,630
12  (10) James Blake (USA)             2,405
13  (18) Nicolas Almagro (ESP)         2,025
14  (13) Stanislas Wawrinka (SUI)      1,980
15  (14) Gael Monfils (FRA)            1,935
16  (15) Fernando Gonzalez (CHI)       1,885
17  (20) Tomas Berdych (CZE)           1,805
18  (16) Fernando Verdasco (ESP)       1,710
19  (17) Robin Soderling (SWE)         1,695
20  (19) Igor Andreev (RUS)            1,690
21  (21) Tommy Robredo (ESP)           1,670
22  (24) Mardy Fish (USA)              1,565
23  (27) Radek Stepanek (CZE)          1,520
24  (26) Ivo Karlovic (CRO)            1,505
25  (30) Feliciano Lopez (ESP)         1,470
26  (25) Richard Gasquet (FRA)         1,445
27  (29) Marat Safin (RUS)             1,395
28  (33) Rainer Schuettler (GER)       1,342
29  (23) Marin Cilic (CRO)             1,295
30  (38) Nicolas Kiefer (GER)          1,295
31  (32) Mikhail Youzhny (RUS)         1,285
32  (22) Dmitry Tursunov (RUS)         1,260
33  (28) Philipp Kohlschreiber (GER)   1,250
34  (40) Michael Llodra (FRA)          1,220
35  (39) Sam Querrey (USA)             1,200
36  (35) Andreas Seppi (ITA)           1,165
37  (36) Mario Ancic (CRO)             1,125
38  (37) Jarkko Nieminen (FIN)         1,110
39  (31) Paul-Henri Mathieu (FRA)      1,075
40  (41) Simone Bolelli (ITA)          1,056
41  (61) Steve Darcis (BEL)            1,032
42  (48) Jose Acasuso (ARG)            1,015
43  (34) Jurgen Melzer (AUT)           1,013
44  (57) Viktor Troicki (SRB)            993
45  (53) Ernests Gulbis (LAT)            965
46  (56) Marcel Granollers (ESP)         945
47  (43) Julien Benneteau (FRA)          925
48  (42) Carlos Moya (ESP)               900
49  (45) Albert Montanes (ESP)           900
50  (46) Juan Monaco (ARG)               895
51  (50) Victor Hanescu (ROU)            890
52  (47) Igor Kunitsyn (RUS)             888
53  (51) Robby Ginepri (USA)             870
54  (59) Florent Serra (FRA)             853
55  (49) Janko Tipsarevic (SRB)          840
56  (54) Marc Gicquel (FRA)              838
57  (58) Eduardo Schwank (ARG)           837
58  (55) Juan-Carlo Ferrero (ESP)        835
59  (63) Kei Nishikori (JPN)             828
60  (52) Fabrice Santoro (FRA)           818
61  (62) Guillermo Garcia-Lopez (ESP)    785
62  (60) Agustin Calleri (ARG)           780
63  (82) Tommy Haas (GER)                770
64  (64) Yen-Hsun Lu (TPE)               757
65  (65) Teimuraz Gabashvili (RUS)       753
66  (70) Bobby Reynolds (USA)            743
67  (44) Ivan Ljubicic (CRO)             710
68  (72) Potito Starace (ITA)            706
69  (67) Lleyton Hewitt (AUS)            700
70  (84) Kristof Vliegen (BEL)           692
71  (76) Vincent Spadea (USA)            690
72  (71) Martin Vassallo-Arguello (ARG)  687
73  (68) Oscar Hernandez (ESP)           684
74  (86) Nicolas Lapentti (ECU)          668
75  (69) Christophe Rochus (BEL)         666
76  (83) Denis Gremelmayr (GER)          664
77  (74) Ivan Navarro-Pastor (ESP)       658
78  (99) Ivo Minar (CZE)                 657
79  (77) Nicolas Massu (CHI)             654
80  (95) Gilles Muller (LUX)             653
81  (79) Guillermo Canas (ARG)           648
82  (66) Philipp Petzschner (GER)        647
83  (85) Thomaz Bellucci (BRZ)           640
84  (93) Arnaud Clement (FRA)            639
85  (78) Diego Junqueira (ARG)           638
86  (88) Fabio Fognini (ITA)             638
87  (81) Jan Hernych (CZE)               636
88  (89) Andrey Golubev (KAZ)            634
89  (94) Nicolas Mahut (FRA)             625
90  (90) Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP)      617
91  (97) Robert Kendrick (USA)           607
92  (75) Jeremy Chardy (FRA)             606
93  (92) Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR)         601
94  (91) Roko Karanusic (CRO)            600
95  (87) Marcos Daniel (BRZ)             596
96  (96) Chris Guccione (AUS)            594
97  (73) Nicolas Devilder (FRA)          587
98  (80) Mischa Zverev (GER)             585   
99  (98) Marcos Baghdatis (CYP)          555
100 (100) Alberto Martin (ESP)           531

(xx) - position under old ranking system.

A few interesting points to note:

1. Djokovic would have been ranked ahead of Federer.

2. The more over-inflated players are more easily exposed (e.g. Tursunov), while others get a little more recognition for isolated good results in bigger events (e.g. Lopez, Almagro, Kiefer)...not a bad thing, as some will agree.

3. Little protection for year-end top 30 players who later suffer injury/poor form which could push them out of future "cut" for Masters "1000" events, as they are supposedly required to participate in (e.g. Ljubicic...who would probably be ranked below #65 under new system).

Last edited by El Burro; 12-30-2008 at 05:14 PM.
Horatio Caine is offline  
post #3 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:09 PM
When You're On The Poster
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 27
Posts: 42,842
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Save for Nadal, Murray, and Davydenko, everyone else in the top 55 would be altered

Follow my Youtube Channel for all my matches
Follow me on IG for the latest news, vids, pics, and memes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod Laver
We all choke. That’s all right. We’re not machines. What you have to learn is to accept that fact and not panic. It’s the panic that loses the matches, not the nerves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Player
The harder you try, the luckier you get.
Johnny Groove is offline  
 
post #4 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:18 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,367
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

That must have taken a lot of work.

Funny I was just wondering about this very particular topic about 5 minutes ago, then there it is, conveniently on here for me to see.

Obviously the big difference, the one the press would care about, is Djokovic being #2, instead of Federer.

Apart from that I actually thought it would have impacted the rankings more than it did - which was just a bad prediction from me, nothing more (not a comment on the system itself).
krystlel is offline  
post #5 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:22 PM
Registered User
 
kiwi10is's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,415
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

wow that was a lot of work....

Kiefer would be seeded in Australia if the AtP would have recalculated the 2008 results...
kiwi10is is offline  
post #6 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:23 PM
Forum Umpire:
Gaston Gaudio
 
Action Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 124,507
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

I heard somewhere that instead of the finalst points being 70% of the winner, it has been reduced to 60%, so yes the gap is bigger naturally.

For some reason I don't see this getting scrapped after 2009.

On Nadal bumping him on the changeover, Rosol said: "It's ok, he wanted to take my concentration; I knew he would try something".


Wilander on Dimitrov - "He has mind set on imitating Federer and yes it looks good. But he has no idea what to do on the court".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filo V. View Post
I definitely would have preferred Gaba winning as he needs the points much more, but Jan would have beaten him anyway. I expect Hajek to destroy Machado, like 6-1 6-2.
Machado wins 6-2 6-1
Action Jackson is offline  
post #7 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:24 PM Thread Starter
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,604
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by krystlel View Post
That must have taken a lot of work.
A couple of hours...but time better spent than being crushed in the post-Christmas sales.

But yeah, I was wondering about this a good week ago, and thought I'd leave enough time to see if anyone else were to bite the bullet. Blaze was on the right track with his thread, and that was an interesting read.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi10is
Kiefer would be seeded in Australia if the AtP would have recalculated the 2008 results...
Under my calculations, yes...but the points gap (between #30-33) is sufficiently close that someone else compiling a similar list might have placed him just outside the top 32, somehow.

At any rate, he would have been greater rewarded for his strong TMS Canada result.
Horatio Caine is offline  
post #8 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:28 PM
Anathemaniac
 
Sunset of Age's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Wall.
Posts: 41,908
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Burro View Post
A few interesting points to note:

1. Djokovic would have been ranked ahead of Federer.

2. The more over-inflated players are more easily exposed (e.g. Tursunov), while others get a little more recognition for isolated good results in bigger events (e.g. Lopez, Almagro)...not a bad thing, as some will agree.

3. Little protection for year-end top 30 players who later suffer injury/poor form which could push them out of future "cut" for Masters "1000" events, as they are supposedly required to participate in (e.g. Ljubicic...who would probably be ranked below #65 under new system).
Great job!

Quote:
Originally Posted by krystlel View Post
Obviously the big difference, the one the press would care about, is Djokovic being #2, instead of Federer.
Well the difference of merely 10 points now is barely what you may call a 'major lead' for Feds anyways.

"It's getting colder, I'm getting colder, older, it's getting colder...

Am I still here? As one, with The Fear?
Am I still alive? I'm still f*cking ... Here...!"


"The Storm Before The Calm"

Anathema

Into music of the PROG-Dorky-kind? visit my blog or MTF's Prog Rock Thread.
Sunset of Age is offline  
post #9 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:29 PM
When You're On The Poster
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 27
Posts: 42,842
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Burro View Post
A couple of hours...but time better spent than being crushed in the post-Christmas sales.

But yeah, I was wondering about this a good week ago, and thought I'd leave enough time to see if anyone else were to bite the bullet. Blaze was on the right track with his thread, and that was an interesting read.
Yeah, mine took a good while as well. Time well spent though as I'm also post-Christmas broke

Jez, if we in theory applied my point structure to the 08 rankings, you think anyone would change?

Follow my Youtube Channel for all my matches
Follow me on IG for the latest news, vids, pics, and memes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod Laver
We all choke. That’s all right. We’re not machines. What you have to learn is to accept that fact and not panic. It’s the panic that loses the matches, not the nerves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Player
The harder you try, the luckier you get.
Johnny Groove is offline  
post #10 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:45 PM Thread Starter
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,604
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaze-2004 View Post
Yeah, mine took a good while as well. Time well spent though as I'm also post-Christmas broke

Jez, if we in theory applied my point structure to the 08 rankings, you think anyone would change?


Yeah, good question Jon...and I'm really not sure how to answer it! On the one hand, I think you're giving greater recognition for stronger achievement in the biggest events (GS and Masters)...so maybe Federer would suffer a little more, in that respect, and players like Kiefer, Safin, Lopez, Seppi etc (who scored the odd one or two strong results at Masters/GS level) might benefit from a few extra positions.

On the other hand, this might be negated by your more even distribution of points in the lower events (compared to the points on offer for the bigger events)...so the guys living more off their optionals results (including those players emerging from challenger level) might actually reclaim some of the positions they might have lost under the new 2009 rankings system.


Away from the analysis, I like your breakdown of points for the GS/Masters level...but I agree with a few others in thinking that maybe you were over-rewarding good results at Futures level (although I share your belief that these guys, in particular, would need a helping hand as concerns their career prospects...especially if they didn't make immediate moves up the rankings).
Horatio Caine is offline  
post #11 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:47 PM
When You're On The Poster
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 27
Posts: 42,842
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Burro View Post


Yeah, good question Jon...and I'm really not sure how to answer it! On the one hand, I think you're giving greater recognition for stronger achievement in the biggest events (GS and Masters)...so maybe Federer would suffer a little more, in that respect, and players like Kiefer, Safin, Lopez, Seppi etc (who scored the odd one or two strong results at Masters/GS level) might benefit from a few extra positions.

On the other hand, this might be negated by your more even distribution of points in the lower events (compared to the points on offer for the bigger events)...so the guys living more off their optionals results (including those players emerging from challenger level) might actually reclaim some of the positions they might have lost under the new 2009 rankings system.


Away from the analysis, I like your breakdown of points for the GS/Masters level...but I agree with a few others in thinking that maybe you were over-rewarding good results at Futures level (although I share your belief that these guys, in particular, would need a helping hand as concerns their career prospects...especially if they didn't make immediate moves up the rankings).
I changed it actually, I gave less points for futures, but the biggest thing I think is giving points for qualifying for futures. The fact that an 18 year old kid can win 3-4 matches in qualifying and not get even a point for it was bullshit in my opinion.

Follow my Youtube Channel for all my matches
Follow me on IG for the latest news, vids, pics, and memes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod Laver
We all choke. That’s all right. We’re not machines. What you have to learn is to accept that fact and not panic. It’s the panic that loses the matches, not the nerves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Player
The harder you try, the luckier you get.
Johnny Groove is offline  
post #12 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:53 PM Thread Starter
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,604
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaze-2004 View Post
I changed it actually, I gave less points for futures, but the biggest thing I think is giving points for qualifying for futures. The fact that an 18 year old kid can win 3-4 matches in qualifying and not get even a point for it was bullshit in my opinion.
Yeah, I think they should get 1 point for qualifying (or maybe introduce a 0.5pt), as recognition for potentially winning 3 matches (if unseeded in qualies). I remember reading about a British player (maybe in 2007?) who had qualified for a number of Futures events but didn't score his first point until something like his 5th, 6th or 7th main draw R1 attempt...pretty rough going! Especially when we're talking of players/tennis nations that perhaps need all the support they can get in reaching the higher levels of competition.
Horatio Caine is offline  
post #13 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:55 PM
Registered User
 
Andre♥'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 9,005
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system would have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Burro View Post
A couple of hours...but time better spent than being crushed in the post-Christmas sales.
Black Friday > *

Great job, Jez!
Andre♥ is offline  
post #14 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 04:56 PM
When You're On The Poster
 
Johnny Groove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 27
Posts: 42,842
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Burro View Post
Yeah, I think they should get 1 point for qualifying (or maybe introduce a 0.5pt), as recognition for potentially winning 3 matches (if unseeded in qualies). I remember reading about a British player (maybe in 2007?) who had qualified for a number of Futures events but didn't score his first point until something like his 5th, 6th or 7th main draw R1 attempt...pretty rough going! Especially when we're talking of players/tennis nations that perhaps need all the support they can get in reaching the higher levels of competition.
I don't think 0.5 points would work too well, it could easily become confusing, no?

Maybe 2 points for qualifying for the biggest future and only 1 point for the other 2?

Follow my Youtube Channel for all my matches
Follow me on IG for the latest news, vids, pics, and memes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod Laver
We all choke. That’s all right. We’re not machines. What you have to learn is to accept that fact and not panic. It’s the panic that loses the matches, not the nerves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Player
The harder you try, the luckier you get.
Johnny Groove is offline  
post #15 of 159 (permalink) Old 12-27-2008, 05:53 PM
Banned!
 
GlennMirnyi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: I'm in Porto Alegre, bitch!
Posts: 42,099
                     
Re: How the new 2009 rankings system might have impacted on the 2008 year-end ranking

Shows what a freaking pathetic job ATP is doing changing the points.

Hope this goes wrong in all possible manners.
GlennMirnyi 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