2009 and 2010 Challenger Points [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

2009 and 2010 Challenger Points

Count Zero
10-29-2008, 03:17 PM
cant be sure this info is 100% yet:

$125,000 CHALLENGER

Increase: (25%) ( 7%) (-3%) (-5%) (-33%)
2009 W (100) F (60) SF (35) QF (18) 16 (6)
2008 W (80) F (56) SF (36) QF (19) 16 (8)

$50,000 CHALLENGER

Increase: (50%) (28 %) (22 %) (25%) (0%)
2009 W (75) F (45) SF (27) QF (15) 16 (5)
2008 W (50) F (35) SF (22) QF (12) 16 (5)

$15,000 FUTURES
Increase: (28%) (16%) (16%) (0%) (0%)
2009 W (25) F (14) SF (7) QF (3) 16 (1)
2008 W (18) F (12) SF (6) QF (3) 16 (1)

Jader Magri
10-29-2008, 03:58 PM
Link of information????

Challengers with $35, $75, $100, $150 ???

Count Zero
10-29-2008, 04:00 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081027.WBTennis20081027150737/WBStory/WBTennis

amirbachar
10-29-2008, 06:51 PM
That is very little difference between 50K and 125K.

TankingTheSet
10-29-2008, 07:53 PM
This won't be enough to make up the big difference between ATP (especially the '500' tournaments) and challengers. Things will get pretty messed up. Fluke runs in bigger tournaments (such as ATP 500) will dominate the rankings. Players currently in the top-80 may still stay here in 2009 even if they have horrible form all year, based on one or two fluke results in ATP tournaments. It will be much more difficult to get into the top-100 for players not already established there.

CooCooCachoo
10-30-2008, 12:01 PM
This won't be enough to make up the big difference between ATP (especially the '500' tournaments) and challengers. Things will get pretty messed up. Fluke runs in bigger tournaments (such as ATP 500) will dominate the rankings. Players currently in the top-80 may still stay here in 2009 even if they have horrible form all year, based on one or two fluke results in ATP tournaments. It will be much more difficult to get into the top-100 for players not already established there.

Yes, unfortunately it has been a tradition for the ATP to appreciate fluke runs over solidity in Challengers.

Renaud
10-31-2008, 11:37 AM
cant be sure this info is 100% yet:

$125,000 CHALLENGER

Increase: (25%) ( 7%) (-3%) (-5%) (-33%)
2009 W (100) F (60) SF (35) QF (18) 16 (6)
2008 W (80) F (56) SF (36) QF (19) 16 (8)


OMFG !!!!!!!!!!!!!
:rolleyes:

Count Zero
10-31-2008, 01:09 PM
OMFG !!!!!!!!!!!!!
:rolleyes:

i agree. if this points system is true then the difference between the 2 levels of challengers isnt much. So perhaps the cuts on the top challengers will drop whilst the cuts on the lower challengers will rise?

the difference in points between the rounds now is:
W-25 F-15 S-8 Q-3 16-1
and before:
W-30 F-21 S-14 Q-7 16-3

CooCooCachoo
10-31-2008, 06:56 PM
i agree. if this points system is true then the difference between the 2 levels of challengers isnt much. So perhaps the cuts on the top challengers will drop whilst the cuts on the lower challengers will rise?

the difference in points between the rounds now is:
W-25 F-15 S-8 Q-3 16-1
and before:
W-30 F-21 S-14 Q-7 16-3

I think that there hasn't been that much correspondance between Challengers with a really high amount of prize money ($125K or $150K) and the cut-offs; the strongest Challengers usually have slightly less prize money, but just better scheduling (e.g. Sunrise, which is $100K). Players tend to look for more things than just prize money.

Count Zero
11-05-2008, 04:23 PM
I think that there hasn't been that much correspondance between Challengers with a really high amount of prize money ($125K or $150K) and the cut-offs; the strongest Challengers usually have slightly less prize money, but just better scheduling (e.g. Sunrise, which is $100K). Players tend to look for more things than just prize money.

yes thats ture - location and surface i guess are the main factors. Surbiton is probably one of the worst offenders, offering minimal money but getting big names due to being grass right before queens etc.

fast_clay
11-08-2008, 05:13 PM
really, really bad stats there at 125k from winner thru to r16...

i see some really good players touring challengers, i mean, top 100 good, yet... at the moment, they slave away all year to get to around 350 or 400pts (2008 system) and then are ready to do some main draws at MM tourneys... the catch is for many of these players is that they have the choice of doing main draws at atp level for a month and crashing out VS going back to challenger level and defending sometimes sizable chunks of that 400 pts... i guess you just gotta hope your decent rank coincides with grandslam draw entry time...

the challenger level is the breadbasket of the tour... where the majority of the talent arrives from... while money could be even better at this level, it is the points that are of interest as many players are being bankrolled to a large degree until they are inside the top 200 or 150...

the new system is one for the rich... as the purchase of wildcards will become a precious commodity, as like has been said here already, the system will be rewarding freakish runs VS solid year round from...

at what rank will the new tour ghetto be set... 150...?

points at 125K... :silly: clownish... clownish red...

hopefully we wont see a lot of static ranking from 75 to 150... for mine, a good tour should have a lot of very, easy movement between these ranks...

GustavoM_Fan
11-08-2008, 07:42 PM
what a joke. they think players dont play tennis on challengerS???? :confused:

i suppose ch players will do something to solve this ridiculous schet

scarecrows
11-09-2008, 10:24 PM
i suppose ch players will do something to solve this ridiculous schet

they will play more ATP qualies

Smoke944
11-09-2008, 10:31 PM
I believe Dani Koellerer has a lovely phrase that about sums up this mess ;)

Zirconek
12-04-2008, 03:56 PM
I can't find any official release, but according to a news (in Portuguese) the 2009 Challengers points should be (info only after QF):


Type W | RU | SF | QF
------------------------------
150K 110 | 65| 40 | 20
125K 100 | 60 | 35 |18
100K 90| 55| 33 |17
75K 80| 48| 29 |15
35K+H 75 |45| 27 |13

W- Winner
RU- Runner-Up
SF- Semifinalist
QF- Quarterfinalist

current points system: http://stevegtennis.com/entrypoints.txt

you have a comparison between the two sytems in previous posts (% of increase)

source: http://esporte.uol.com.br/tenis/ultimas/2008/12/04/ult4364u3365.jhtm

Super-Fabio
12-07-2008, 11:52 AM
http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/2386/2009rankingpointspc0.jpg

Nathaliia
12-07-2008, 12:09 PM
This is just crazy :eek: Was it this idiot De Villiers idea?

JMG
12-07-2008, 01:22 PM
:sad:

CooCooCachoo
12-07-2008, 03:39 PM
Great :rolleyes:

ZackBusner
12-10-2008, 08:29 PM
I still think the gap between challengers and ATP tour is not as big as it looks. Challenger players dont't compete with players who win ATP titles but with players who make a QF from time to time. Winning a challenger will give you more points than 250 QF.

TankingTheSet
12-11-2008, 12:16 AM
I still think the gap between challengers and ATP tour is not as big as it looks. Challenger players dont't compete with players who win ATP titles but with players who make a QF from time to time. Winning a challenger will give you more points than 250 QF.

The balance between ATP and challengers is a delicate thing. The proposed changes cause a huge change in the "total ranking points available from challengers" vs the "total ranking points available from ATP/AMS/GS". The points distribution in the rankings will change completely (top-heavy), and you will see a higher-ranked player (let's call him "Player A") in very poor form being able to maintain top-30 or top-50 position with a few fluke results. A consistent performer in challengers (SF, F, W) ("Player B") will have trouble making the top-100.

In the old ranking system Player A would be ranked about 90 and Player B about 70 at the end of 2009.
In the new rankings system Player A will be ranked about 50 and Player B about 110 at then end of 2009.

Result: Player A, despite a very poor season, will not see his ranking position threatened by a upcoming player with a very good challenger record such as Player B.

Nathaliia
12-11-2008, 12:22 AM
In other words, Bellucci would have not been where he is.

Venle
12-11-2008, 10:20 AM
:smash:

ZackBusner
12-11-2008, 08:34 PM
The balance between ATP and challengers is a delicate thing. The proposed changes cause a huge change in the "total ranking points available from challengers" vs the "total ranking points available from ATP/AMS/GS". The points distribution in the rankings will change completely (top-heavy), and you will see a higher-ranked player (let's call him "Player A") in very poor form being able to maintain top-30 or top-50 position with a few fluke results. A consistent performer in challengers (SF, F, W) ("Player B") will have trouble making the top-100.

In the old ranking system Player A would be ranked about 90 and Player B about 70 at the end of 2009.
In the new rankings system Player A will be ranked about 50 and Player B about 110 at then end of 2009.

Result: Player A, despite a very poor season, will not see his ranking position threatened by a upcoming player with a very good challenger record such as Player B.

I don't say there is no problem at all. I just think the problem is not as big as it may look. Most of the additional points available at the big events will go to the winners and finalists. These are mainly top 30 or top 40 players who are out of reach for the challenger players anyway. A player who wins some challengers will still gain more points than a player who who reaches only a few QFs at 250 events.

Ozone
12-18-2008, 02:21 PM
Im glad to see more money in the futures and less in the early rounds of chalengers.

duong
02-12-2009, 05:00 PM
I have one question :

How can we do to know in which category a challenger is considered for the ranking points ?

For instance Belgrade is next week : the prize money is 106.5K+H in euros, which makes around 136.000$+H

What's its category : 125.000 $ ? 150.000 $ ? 150.000 $ + H ?

Thanks a lot in advance :wavey:

In other words, Bellucci would have not been where he is.

He would have been only two ranks lower in the end of 2008 :

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=135286&highlight=journeymen&page=8

Blarghman
02-12-2009, 05:38 PM
I have one question :

How can we do to know in which category a challenger is considered for the ranking points ?

For instance Belgrade is next week : the prize money is 106.5K+H in euros, which makes around 136.000$+H

What's its category : 125.000 $ ? 150.000 $ ? 150.000 $ + H ?

Thanks a lot in advance :wavey:


According to the tournament details, the points breakdown is:

W F SF QF R/16 R/32 R/64 Q
110 65 40 20 9 0 NA 5

So, $150K points are awarded.

It looks to me like the policy is to round downwards, so that you get the points of the level directly below. So, a $136K would get the points of the level closest to 136 going downwards, so $125K. Since it has +H, it goes up to $150K.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can confirm this, though :)

duong
02-12-2009, 06:54 PM
According to the tournament details, the points breakdown is:

W F SF QF R/16 R/32 R/64 Q
110 65 40 20 9 0 NA 5

So, $150K points are awarded.

It looks to me like the policy is to round downwards, so that you get the points of the level directly below. So, a $136K would get the points of the level closest to 136 going downwards, so $125K. Since it has +H, it goes up to $150K.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can confirm this, though :)

Thanks a lot :yeah:

Where can you get these tournament details actually ?

It might be enough for me if I could easily find these :D

Count Zero
02-13-2009, 08:22 AM
http://stevegtennis.com/rankpoints.txt

is where i look for points

duong
02-13-2009, 09:38 AM
http://stevegtennis.com/rankpoints.txt

is where i look for points

I meant :

where do you know the details about one specific tournament to know which rankings category it belongs to or how many points it gives (which is the same) ?

Count Zero
02-13-2009, 09:59 PM
right,

this calendar (http://stevegtennis.com/atpres.htm) has the challengers converted to the $ equivalent, but cant be sure its 100% correct.
the points will also be shown on the atp draw sheets.

Zirconek
02-14-2009, 11:12 AM
right,

this calendar (http://stevegtennis.com/atpres.htm) has the challengers converted to the $ equivalent, but cant be sure its 100% correct.
the points will also be shown on the atp draw sheets.

it's a shame ATP is not releasing the Challengers factsheet anymore, which used to be available at steveg's calendar.

Count Zero
02-14-2009, 11:57 AM
yes, i was wondering where that went too

Blarghman
02-14-2009, 07:43 PM
The factsheets can still be accessed, but given they they are meant to be secure on the ATP Playerzone server, I'm loath to post a link in public. If anyone wants to know how to access them, they can PM me, and I can see if I can help out :)

Zirconek
01-07-2010, 02:09 PM
2010 Ranking Points

http://stevegtennis.com/rankpoints.txt

Computer Points
Prize Money/ W- F - S- Q - 16- 32 qualifying
-------- ----------- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ----- ----------
125,000+H/ 125- 75- 45- 25- 10- 0- 5
125,000/ 110- 65- 40- 20- 9- 0- 5
100,000/ 100- 60- 35- 18- 8- 0- 5
75,000/ 90- 55- 33- 17- 8- 0- 5
50,000/ 80- 48- 29- 15- 7- 0- 3
35,000+H/ 80- 48- 29- 15- 6- 0- 3

**** Challengers or Futures providing hospitality will receive the points of the next
highest prize money level (except $35,000+H). (Note: $125,000+H points are shown for Challengers and
15,000+H for Futures).

How it was last year (2009):

cant be sure this info is 100% yet:

$125,000 CHALLENGER

Increase: (25%) ( 7%) (-3%) (-5%) (-33%)
2009 W (100) F (60) SF (35) QF (18) 16 (6)
2008 W (80) F (56) SF (36) QF (19) 16 (8)

$50,000 CHALLENGER

Increase: (50%) (28 %) (22 %) (25%) (0%)
2009 W (75) F (45) SF (27) QF (15) 16 (5)
2008 W (50) F (35) SF (22) QF (12) 16 (5)

$15,000 FUTURES
Increase: (28%) (16%) (16%) (0%) (0%)
2009 W (25) F (14) SF (7) QF (3) 16 (1)
2008 W (18) F (12) SF (6) QF (3) 16 (1)

http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/2386/2009rankingpointspc0.jpg

Labamba
01-08-2010, 10:31 PM
good to see them rise :yeah:

Smoke944
01-10-2010, 03:38 AM
Indeed :yeah: