A question about the ranking rules for the top 30 - MensTennisForums.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 10:21 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,563
                     
A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

On the ATP site it says that for the top 30 players, only their two best ATP 250 tournaments will count for their rankings. But then again, I look at a player like Stan Wawrinka, who in this year won 150 points in Chennai, 250 in Casablanca and 90 in Belgrade. How can that be? Are his points in Belgrade supposed to be taken away at the end of the year?
andy neyer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 10:35 PM
Registered User
 
delpiero7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Age: 28
Posts: 1,933
                     
Re: A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/P...inka.aspx?t=rb

Belgrade is in his non-countables as it is only his 3rd best result in a 250

Juan Martin Del Potro

David Ferrer - Tommy Haas - Jo-Wilfried Tsonga

Andy Roddick - Juan Carlos Ferrero - Mardy Fish
delpiero7 is offline  
post #3 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 10:36 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 73
                     
Re: A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

He is not counting Belgrade among his ranking points at the moment, but only Chennai and Casablanca. If you look at his page, http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/P...inka.aspx?t=rb , you see that Belgrade is among his "non countable tournaments".
If next year, when Chennai points will come off, Waw won't have a better 250/CH-results among his tournaments, Belgrade points will be added (*)


(*) that, of course, not considering the new rule about the possibility (under certain circumstances) to replace the worst 500-results with a non-countable tournament at the end of the year.
Abc Tennis is offline  
post #4 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 10:48 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,563
                     
Re: A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

Thanks, guys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abc Tennis View Post
(*) that, of course, not considering the new rule about the possibility (under certain circumstances) to replace the worst 500-results with a non-countable tournament at the end of the year.
What are those circumstances? I presume it is not possible to replace an "extra" 250 ATP for a "missing" 500 ATP given that Wawrinka only has 3 countable 500 ATP at the moment (instead of 4, which is the number of ATP 500 that the ATP is willing to count, according to the rules), right?
andy neyer is offline  
post #5 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 10:56 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 73
                     
Re: A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy neyer View Post
What are those circumstances? I presume it is not possible to replace an "extra" 250 ATP for a "missing" 500 ATP given that Wawrinka only has 3 countable 500 ATP at the moment (instead of 4, which is the number of ATP 500 that the ATP is willing to count, according to the rules), right?
Yep, you have to play 4 ATP 500 (or equivalent - Davis Cup/Montecarlo) tournaments and one of them has to be after the US Open. If you do that (and if you don't get a 0-pointer somewhere), you can replace the worst 500 with a better 250/CH.
Abc Tennis is offline  
post #6 of 6 (permalink) Old 05-21-2010, 11:05 PM Thread Starter
Banned!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,563
                     
Re: A question about the ranking rules for the top 30

Interesting. The ranking system doesn't seem that simple after all.

This also raises my attention because it has been said many times around here that if Federer makes the semis in RG while Nadal goes to win the tournament, then he would be 50 points ahead of Nadal an thus would equal Sampras' record of weeks at number 1 (which is correct) but then people say that he would need to do better in Halle than Nadal in Queen's to definitely break the record which is something that doesn't seem to be correct given that Federer has already played 2 ATP 250 this year making the SF in both (Doha and Estoril) so at best he could only gain 250-90=160 in Halle which means that, no matter what Federer does after RG, Nadal would become number 1 if he wins Queen's (having made the previous assumption that Federer would lose in the SF and Nadal would go on to win RG).
andy neyer 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