What's better - a Major QF win or a Masters Championship? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What's better - a Major QF win or a Masters Championship?

samjones
01-24-2011, 10:13 PM
The ATP gives 360 ranking points for a Major QF win and 400 for winning a Masters. About the same.

Think that's fair?

Shade
01-24-2011, 10:32 PM
Pretty winning one of the nine masters tournaments gives you 1000 points.

bigBOSS
01-24-2011, 10:57 PM
maybe winning masters vs slam runnerup.

Certinfy
01-24-2011, 10:58 PM
What?

Montego
01-24-2011, 10:59 PM
The ATP gives 360 ranking points for a Major QF win and 400 for winning a Masters. About the same.

Think that's fair?

:cuckoo:

Clydey
01-24-2011, 11:01 PM
1000 for a Masters.

@Sweet Cleopatra
01-24-2011, 11:06 PM
The ATP gives 360 ranking points for a Major QF win and 400 for winning a Masters. About the same.

Think that's fair?

That was in the past, they have changed the rules since may be 2 years and points are not the same.

samjones
01-25-2011, 01:09 AM
1000 for a Masters.

You get 400 points for winning the final match of a Masters championship. You guys ever pay attention to the tennis rankings?

You get 360 for winning a QF match in a Major.

abraxas21
01-25-2011, 01:46 AM
You get 400 points for winning the final match of a Masters championship. You guys ever pay attention to the tennis rankings?

You get 360 for winning a QF match in a Major.

i thought you meant that when i was considering replying. still, the question is wrongly worded.

Benny_Maths
01-25-2011, 01:51 AM
It depends on the individual. Some might value the MS win more than the QF in a GS because honestly, who is going to remember the quarter-finalists of any tournament? Apart from a minuscule proportion of the general population of course.

samjones
01-25-2011, 02:10 AM
i thought you meant that when i was considering replying. still, the question is wrongly worded.

Some people don't read hardly at all and then they misunderstand the parts they do read. The semis and the finals get short-shrift when the points are being multiplied. Is a Major QF win as good as a Masters finals win? I don't think so.

shiaben
01-25-2011, 02:13 AM
Major QF. You are playing with the best in long duration sets. This shows who came to play who didn't. At the masters most top players stop trying after they win a few and reach top ranks or win slams.

Xristos
01-25-2011, 02:19 AM
Masters 1000.

GlennMirnyi
01-25-2011, 02:23 AM
The name you're searching for is "world tour finals", isn't it?

Well it all depends on the draw. If it's 2010 USO-like, then it's better to win the Bucamaranga challenger.

fast_clay
01-25-2011, 02:24 AM
yeah, better..

tests
01-25-2011, 02:29 AM
i dont know whats "better" but making a qf in GS is probably more difficult

Clydey
01-25-2011, 02:53 AM
i dont know whats "better" but making a qf in GS is probably more difficult

No, it isn't. You don't really play anyone of note until the quarters. To get to the final of the WTF, you have to beat at least 3 of the top 8 and then you're probably going to face Federer in the final. It's not even close.

GlennMirnyi
01-25-2011, 02:55 AM
No, it isn't. You don't really play anyone of note until the quarters. To get to the final of the WTF, you have to beat at least 3 of the top 8 and then you're probably going to face Federer in the final. It's not even close.

A clear sign of a weak era.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 02:57 AM
A clear sign of a weak era.

A clear sign of a poor seeding system.

Anyway, off to sleep. Don't want to get drawn into an argument.

tests
01-25-2011, 03:03 AM
No, it isn't. You don't really play anyone of note until the quarters. To get to the final of the WTF, you have to beat at least 3 of the top 8 and then you're probably going to face Federer in the final. It's not even close.

FUck me, i thought it read masters series, not world tours! IN that case, WTF is more difficult imo.

Mjau!
01-25-2011, 03:05 AM
So, according to the rankings...

Masters SF = Major QF
Masters final > Major QF
Masters title > Major SF

Right?

Love Game
01-25-2011, 03:17 AM
You get 500 for winning the final of the World Tour Finals. Plus to even qualify you need to have had a great year so I'd say that is better.

samjones
01-25-2011, 12:24 PM
So, according to the rankings...

Masters SF = Major QF
Masters final > Major QF
Masters title > Major SF

Right?

You get 400 points for winning a Masters final. You get 480 for winning a Major SF.

So, no, not right. A Major SF is worth more than a Masters Final. A Major QF and a Masters Final are very close in value - 400/360 with the Masgters Final having the edge.

I have no idea why that guy keeps talking about WTF - it's a completely different subject with a totally different scoring system.

Puschkin
01-25-2011, 01:32 PM
Simply for being allowed to play at the WTF, a single GS QF won't do.

BlueSwan
01-25-2011, 01:37 PM
Samjones proves once again he knows zilch about tennis. Stick to MLB and NFL mate.
Erm...he's right mate. :confused:

decrepitude
01-25-2011, 01:57 PM
I have no idea why that guy keeps talking about WTF - it's a completely different subject with a totally different scoring system.

Probably because the title says "Masters Championship" which to most people would imply the year-end Masters Finals. An ordinary one would just be "Masters 1000".

(I can't believe I'm sticking up for GlennMirnyi)

ShotmaKer
01-25-2011, 02:07 PM
Erm...he's right mate. :confused:

Went back through the thread and fair enough. The difference between a MS1000 winner and a a MS1000 finalist is 400 points. The difference between a GS SF and a GS QF is 360 points. So I do see his point but still, winning the final match of a MS1000 means you've actually won the tournament hence you go home with 1000 points. Whereas winning a QF in a GS and losing in the SF means you go home with 720 points.

shuhrat
01-25-2011, 02:28 PM
Gimelstob explains rankings system changes (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/match-tough/article718306.ece)

.... This was our thinking in implementing the new system.

1. Our main goal was to simplify the points system so people could understand it better; the old system had too many layers that few but tennis insiders could comprehend. The new system has a clear differentiation between tournament categories, obviously each lower category has half of its higher category.

3. After that we went to work to try and find similar values in point distribution. Obviously it wasn't possible to accomplish that exactly but we did the best we could. Thus getting to the finals of a 500 is equivalent to getting to the semis of a 1000 (similar to what we have right now). Same is true with other rounds.

propi
01-25-2011, 02:31 PM
Masters basically because you WIN something:worship:

samjones
01-25-2011, 05:50 PM
Went back through the thread and fair enough. The difference between a MS1000 winner and a a MS1000 finalist is 400 points. The difference between a GS SF and a GS QF is 360 points. So I do see his point but still, winning the final match of a MS1000 means you've actually won the tournament hence you go home with 1000 points. Whereas winning a QF in a GS and losing in the SF means you go home with 720 points.

I'll take this as the closest you can get to admitting you were wrong and apologizing.

ShotmaKer
01-25-2011, 05:55 PM
I'll take this as the closest you can get to admitting you were wrong and apologizing.

:lol:

I was too quick to judge this time and I apologize.

DrJules
01-25-2011, 05:58 PM
Masters basically because you WIN something:worship:

Agree.

romismak
01-25-2011, 06:03 PM
To SamJones
Stupid question. 1000 points is for MAsters 1000 tournaments- what is by far more important than QF of GS- even more important to win Masters than SF of GS- i would say it is equal to GS final or almost equal. And if you mean that 400 is for winning final on Masters, than i can make the same stupid thread that what is more important winning GS or winning master 1000 and i say that 1000 points for master tournament and just,, 800 points to win final at GS- the same stupid thread like this one

samjones
01-25-2011, 06:19 PM
To SamJones
Stupid question. 1000 points is for MAsters 1000 tournaments- what is by far more important than QF of GS- even more important to win Masters than SF of GS- i would say it is equal to GS final or almost equal.

I don't think the ATP really cares what you say. A Masters Championship win is worth 400 and a Major SF win is worth 480.

samjones
01-25-2011, 06:24 PM
each lower category has half of its higher category.

Not true for the 1st round, the semi-final or the final of a Major. Therein lies the inequity. A major should be worth 2880, otherwise you will wind up with obvious inequities in the scoring system. Dolgopolov stands to get nearly as many points tonight as if he would winning Miami.

Kworb
01-25-2011, 06:44 PM
Essentially you are comparing Masters win (+400, 1000 total) to GS SF (+360, 720 total). I think these points are fair. Winning M1000 is worth only a little more than reaching GS SF.

Ozone
01-25-2011, 07:39 PM
Major R3 win would be better than a MS title, imo. It's how you make a name for yourself in the real world

Clydey
01-25-2011, 09:46 PM
Not true for the 1st round, the semi-final or the final of a Major. Therein lies the inequity. A major should be worth 2880, otherwise you will wind up with obvious inequities in the scoring system. Dolgopolov stands to get nearly as many points tonight as if he would winning Miami.

No, he doesn't. He isn't getting 1000 points if he wins tonight.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 09:49 PM
Major R3 win would be better than a MS title, imo. It's how you make a name for yourself in the real world

No one gives a toss about R3 of a major. You actually have to beat the best players in the world to win an MS1000.

Seriously, R3? There's overrating the difficulty of a major and then there's taking the piss. You're taking the piss.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 09:52 PM
I don't think the ATP really cares what you say. A Masters Championship win is worth 400 and a Major SF win is worth 480.

But you are ignoring everything that precedes it. In your world, do players get a bye into these rounds? What you get as a whole determines the value of the achievement, not the difference in points between each round.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 09:54 PM
Samjones, I understood you from the start, but most of MTF is too retarded to understand.

Hard to say whats better IMO, But ill give an answer and say a Major QF win if it was your first ever, otherwise winning the final of a masters.

Most people use the correct terms. He should have said World Tour Finals.

I know. I should have used multiquote.

samjones
01-25-2011, 09:58 PM
No, he doesn't. He isn't getting 1000 points if he wins tonight.

He's getting 360 points if he wins tonight. He would get 400 if he were playing to win the Miami final.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 10:03 PM
He's getting 360 points if he wins tonight. He would get 400 if he were playing to win the Miami final.

That's not how it works. You judge what they get as a whole. He gets 1000 points if he wins Miami and 720 if he gets to the semis of the AO. It's that simple.

You cannot just ignore the points that have been accumulated.

mgasol
01-25-2011, 10:05 PM
who cares? its similar thats all what matters.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 10:07 PM
who cares? its similar thats all what matters.

Not in terms of difficulty it isn't.

Certinfy
01-25-2011, 10:10 PM
Depends, Ferrer is capable of both anyway so both are equally as good.

Clydey
01-25-2011, 10:11 PM
Depends, Ferrer is capable of both anyway so both are equally as good.

He is? He hasn't won an MS1000 and he's only been to one final.

Certinfy
01-25-2011, 10:12 PM
He is? He hasn't won an MS1000 and he's only been to one final.
2011 is the year for Ferrer, the real Spanish number 1 will finally come of age.

Apemant
01-25-2011, 10:59 PM
Essentially you are comparing Masters win (+400, 1000 total) to GS SF (+360, 720 total). I think these points are fair. Winning M1000 is worth only a little more than reaching GS SF.

You have expressed it... succinctly. Agreed completely: to win a Masters 1000 is just a little better than reaching a major SF. However, reaching a major final is more important than winning a Masters 1000. Not by much though.

peribsen
01-25-2011, 11:11 PM
A win (or at least a final) is always better than a QF. Winners, even of lesser tournaments, make the history books; QF and SF are soon forgotten by almost everybody.

samjones
01-26-2011, 02:13 AM
That's not how it works. You judge what they get as a whole. He gets 1000 points if he wins Miami and 720 if he gets to the semis of the AO. It's that simple.

You cannot just ignore the points that have been accumulated.

Actually, I can. It's amazing how many so-called tennis fans don't understand the basics of how the ranking points are earned. Rather than simply understanding what I'm telling them they immediately jump up and call me a name.

5 wins in a Major (i.e. QF) is worth way more than 5 wins in a Masters (i.e. SF) despite the fact that compulsory play makes the competition at the Masters just as fierce. Yeah, anyone can win won, but you'll have to beat somebody on your way there. Lube won IW last year, but he had to beat Nole and Rafa to do it.

How's that for not ignoring the points that have been accumulated?

samjones
01-26-2011, 02:15 AM
A win (or at least a final) is always better than a QF. Winners, even of lesser tournaments, make the history books; QF and SF are soon forgotten by almost everybody.

Do you feel that subpar players more frequently luck into a Major QF or into a Masters Final. You think Dolgopolov will make a Masters final this year? I don't.

Joolz
01-26-2011, 02:28 AM
5 wins in a Major (i.e. QF) is worth way more than 5 wins in a Masters (i.e. SF)

Not in terms of ranking points.

GS QF: 360.
Masters SF: 360.

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 02:54 AM
:rolleyes:

It is simply wrong to claim that "The ATP gives... 400 (points) for winning a Masters". The points awarded by the ATP for winning a Masters 1000 are *drumroll* 1000! :eek: The final match of a masters on its own may only be worth an extra 400 points compared to losing that final, but it doesn't change the fact that winning a Masters title results in 1000 fresh points.

The ATP gives 1000 points for winning a Masters, not 400. Okay? :wavey:

Clydey
01-26-2011, 07:39 AM
Actually, I can. It's amazing how many so-called tennis fans don't understand the basics of how the ranking points are earned. Rather than simply understanding what I'm telling them they immediately jump up and call me a name.

5 wins in a Major (i.e. QF) is worth way more than 5 wins in a Masters (i.e. SF) despite the fact that compulsory play makes the competition at the Masters just as fierce. Yeah, anyone can win won, but you'll have to beat somebody on your way there. Lube won IW last year, but he had to beat Nole and Rafa to do it.

How's that for not ignoring the points that have been accumulated?

5 wins in a Masters for the top players means they've won the title. Maybe familiarise yourself with the tour before spouting off? Just a thought.

Echoes
01-26-2011, 09:51 AM
The name you're searching for is "world tour finals", isn't it?

That thing was, is and will always be called the Masters.

The hell with these name changes.

samjones
01-26-2011, 11:36 AM
Not in terms of ranking points.

GS QF: 360.
Masters SF: 360.

If you win a Masters SF you 240 points. If you win a Major QF you get 360 points.

samjones
01-26-2011, 11:38 AM
:rolleyes:

It is simply wrong to claim that "The ATP gives... 400 (points) for winning a Masters". The points awarded by the ATP for winning a Masters 1000 are *drumroll* 1000! :eek: The final match of a masters on its own may only be worth an extra 400 points compared to losing that final, but it doesn't change the fact that winning a Masters title results in 1000 fresh points.

The ATP gives 1000 points for winning a Masters, not 400. Okay? :wavey:

You should try to actually read what I wrote. Yet another person who doesn't read 90% of the post and then misunderstands the 10% that they do read.

samjones
01-26-2011, 11:45 AM
5 wins in a Masters for the top players means they've won the title. Maybe familiarise yourself with the tour before spouting off? Just a thought.

Let's talk about Miami - So last year Andy Roddick beat:

1. Andreev
2. Stakhovsky
3. Becker
4. Almagro
5. Nadal

And guess what - he still hadn't won a title.

Now whether Andy Roddick is a "top player" or not is subject to some debate. Different Masters have different entry numbers - I chose Miami as my example because I've been using it as my example all thread.

I'll wait patiently for your apology.

Joolz
01-26-2011, 11:50 AM
If you win a Masters SF you 240 points. If you win a Major QF you get 360 points.

I suggest taking a look at the current edition of the ATP rulebook, section IX. ATP Rankings.

And if you mean WTF, then it's 400 for a SF win.

samjones
01-26-2011, 01:42 PM
I suggest taking a look at the current edition of the ATP rulebook, section IX. ATP Rankings.

And if you mean WTF, then it's 400 for a SF win.

You didn't ready any of this thread before you wrote that, did you?

Joolz
01-26-2011, 02:33 PM
Well, enough to know that you didn't have a look at the rulebook before you started it.

JanKowalski
01-26-2011, 02:36 PM
LOL at people still failing to understand what the OP meant.

I think it's more or less fair. Usually 5-7 players from the top 8 make the quarters at slams and there are 1-3 lower ranked. In Masters finals this year we had the top 8 + Berdych, Verdasco, Ferrer (all 3 weren't top 8 at the time), Ljubo, Fish and Monfils. It's comparable.

samjones
01-26-2011, 03:00 PM
LOL at people still failing to understand what the OP meant.

I think it's more or less fair. Usually 5-7 players from the top 8 make the quarters at slams and there are 1-3 lower ranked. In Masters finals this year was top 8 + Berdych, Verdasco, Ferrer (all 3 weren't top 8 at the time), Ljubo, Fish and Monfils. It's comparable.

I know - it's a straight-forward question but most people would rather start hurling insults then simply read it and respond with their thoughts - much in the way that you just did (the respond with their thoughts bit), thank you much.

Of course what I said was that *winning* a Major Quarter match is about the same as winning a Masters Final match (points-wise) and I was wondering if people thought that was fair or not.

Last year Joe Willy and Marin and Jerkin and a low-ranked Tomas and Mikhail all won Major QF's last year.

No outliers won a Masters Championship. Nobody but Lube.

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 03:31 PM
You should try to actually read what I wrote. Yet another person who doesn't read 90% of the post and then misunderstands the 10% that they do read.

I actually read what you wrote. Maybe you should actually do the same?

I know - it's a straight-forward question but most people would rather start hurling insults then simply read it and respond with their thoughts - much in the way that you just did (the respond with their thoughts bit), thank you much.

Of course what I said was that *winning* a Major Quarter match is about the same as winning a Masters Final match (points-wise) and I was wondering if people thought that was fair or not.

Last year Joe Willy and Marin and Jerkin and a low-ranked Tomas and Mikhail all won Major QF's last year.

No outliers won a Masters Championship. Nobody but Lube.

Wrong! You said "The ATP gives... 400 (points) for winning a Masters". Maybe you should read the opening post again? :wavey:

Winning the final is only worth (an extra) 400 points, but winning the tournament is worth 1000 points. You said "winning a masters", not "winning a masters final".

samjones
01-26-2011, 03:39 PM
I actually read what you wrote. Maybe you should actually do the same?



Wrong! You said "The ATP gives... 400 (points) for winning a Masters". Maybe you should read the opening post again? :wavey:

Winning the final is only worth (an extra) 400 points, but winning the tournament is worth 1000 points. You said "winning a masters", not "winning a masters final".

You're being way too picky. If you actually read and tried to understand my post you would recognize that I was apples-to-apple comparing a Major QF win to a Master Championship win. Just read the post. If you're trying to find an excuse to insult people then you might be able to come up with some way to intentionally misunderstand a very simple, straight-forward tennis-related question.

Don't paraphrase or remove relevant pieces of what I wrote. Just read the post. The meaning is clear and there's no dispute that I am correct. A Masters Championship match win is worth 400 - a Major QF win is worth 360.

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 03:48 PM
You're being way too picky. If you actually read and tried to understand my post you would recognize that I was apples-to-apple comparing a Major QF win to a Master Championship win. Just read the post. If you're trying to find an excuse to insult people then you might be able to come up with some way to intentionally misunderstand a very simple, straight-forward tennis-related question.

Don't paraphrase or remove relevant pieces of what I wrote. Just read the post. The meaning is clear and there's no dispute that I am correct. A Masters Championship match win is worth 400 - a Major QF win is worth 360.

I did not misunderstand. I simply pointed out an inaccurate statement in the OP. Don't blame me because you were incapable of expressing yourself properly.

Clydey
01-26-2011, 04:07 PM
Let's talk about Miami - So last year Andy Roddick beat:

1. Andreev
2. Stakhovsky
3. Becker
4. Almagro
5. Nadal

And guess what - he still hadn't won a title.

Now whether Andy Roddick is a "top player" or not is subject to some debate. Different Masters have different entry numbers - I chose Miami as my example because I've been using it as my example all thread.

I'll wait patiently for your apology.

That's Miami, moron. You've picked 1 of 2 exceptions. There are 7 other MS1000s.

And guess what? You are still wrong. 5 wins takes you to the final of IW/Miami, not the semi-final.

Clydey
01-26-2011, 04:09 PM
LOL at people still failing to understand what the OP meant.

I think it's more or less fair. Usually 5-7 players from the top 8 make the quarters at slams and there are 1-3 lower ranked. In Masters finals this year we had the top 8 + Berdych, Verdasco, Ferrer (all 3 weren't top 8 at the time), Ljubo, Fish and Monfils. It's comparable.

We understand what he means. We just think it's a stupid way of looking at things. He's isolating each round and ignoring everything that comes beforehand.

Clydey
01-26-2011, 04:10 PM
You're being way too picky. If you actually read and tried to understand my post you would recognize that I was apples-to-apple comparing a Major QF win to a Master Championship win. Just read the post. If you're trying to find an excuse to insult people then you might be able to come up with some way to intentionally misunderstand a very simple, straight-forward tennis-related question.

Don't paraphrase or remove relevant pieces of what I wrote. Just read the post. The meaning is clear and there's no dispute that I am correct. A Masters Championship match win is worth 400 - a Major QF win is worth 360.

It's called the World Tour Finals. Use the correct terms in future.

Joolz
01-26-2011, 04:19 PM
And not all match wins there are worth 400 points.

JanKowalski
01-26-2011, 04:27 PM
And not all match wins there are worth 400 points.

You still don't get it. The OP doesn't mean the WTF. If you bothered to read his second post in this thread (it's on the first page ffs) you and everyone else would clearly understand what he means.

@topic

To my previous post I can add that the fact that DelPo and Davy have been injured for half a year has to be taken into account, when considering this year's QF lineup. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Ferrer, Berdych and Possibly Del Potro and Davydenko - that'd be a great lineup and winning a match between those guys, best of 5, is really worth those 360 points IMO.

Clydey
01-26-2011, 04:37 PM
You still don't get it. The OP doesn't mean the WTF. If you bothered to read his second post in this thread (it's on the first page ffs) you and everyone else would clearly understand what he means.

@topic

To my previous post I can add that the fact that DelPo and Davy have been injured for half a year has to be taken into account, when considering this year's QF lineup. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Ferrer, Berdych and Possibly Del Potro and Davydenko - that'd be a great lineup and winning a match between those guys, best of 5, is really worth those 360 points IMO.

It doesn't matter, either way. Everyone was confused. Now we're talking about MS1000s, so it's irrelevant.

samjones
01-26-2011, 08:07 PM
That's Miami, moron. You've picked 1 of 2 exceptions. There are 7 other MS1000s.

And guess what? You are still wrong. 5 wins takes you to the final of IW/Miami, not the semi-final.

Only if you have a bye. I picked Miami because that's the one I chose before. YOu're being so nitpicky that you don't even know what point you're trying to make or if you ever had a point.

Alot of people here aren't really angry as much as they're just embarassed that they were so dead wrong and they were called out on it so now they're using anger as a defense mechanism.

samjones
01-26-2011, 08:11 PM
I did not misunderstand. I simply pointed out an inaccurate statement in the OP. Don't blame me because you were incapable of expressing yourself properly.

You're just nitpcking. My post was clear. A Masters Championship win is worth 400 and a Major QF win is worth 360.

Apparently this simple statement of fact so angered you that you have to seek revenge.

samjones
01-26-2011, 08:17 PM
It doesn't matter, either way. Everyone was confused. Now we're talking about MS1000s, so it's irrelevant.

I wasn't confused. I knew exactly what we were talking about. If I been confused I would have simply asked for clarification instead of calling everyone names. You might want to take that little tip and see if you can run with it.

Whatever it has been called in the past - ATP World Tour Masters is what it's called now, so I can hardly see why I should apologize for calling it that. 250s and 500s aren't called Masters. Neither is the World Tour Final or the "Grand Slam" or the Davis Cup matches.

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 09:02 PM
You're just nitpcking. My post was clear. A Masters Championship win is worth 400 and a Major QF win is worth 360.

Apparently this simple statement of fact so angered you that you have to seek revenge.

The fact of the matter is that you claimed that "winning a masters" is worth 400 points, which is an inaccurate statement. Pointing that out can only constitute "seeking revenge" in a twisted, paranoid mind.

ShotmaKer
01-26-2011, 09:20 PM
Alot of people here aren't really angry as much as they're just embarassed that they were so dead wrong and they were called out on it so now they're using anger as a defense mechanism.

Don't get too cocky though. As I said, you might have a point, but only relatively speaking. What actually matters is how many points you will have on the ATP ranking board the next monday. Point differences between rounds are less relevant than the total amount of points one wins through a tournament. And winning the final match of a MS1000 means you ACTUALLY go home with a title and 1000 points. Winning the QF of a GS and losing the next match means you ACTUALLY go home with 720 points. What's better? I think it's pretty clear.

samjones
01-26-2011, 09:26 PM
The fact of the matter is that you claimed that "winning a masters" is worth 400 points, which is an inaccurate statement. Pointing that out can only constitute "seeking revenge" in a twisted, paranoid mind.

Kindof Aspergersy, aren't you?

Sonja1989
01-26-2011, 09:28 PM
Masters. Why didn't you make poll?

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 09:38 PM
Dolgopolov stands to get nearly as many points tonight as if he would winning Miami.

Another :crazy: :cuckoo: statement. If Dolgopolov wins Miami, he will have collected 1000 points.

He's getting 360 points if he wins tonight. He would get 400 if he were playing to win the Miami final.

Yeah, but he would've already collected 600 points in reaching the Miami final. Thus, winning Miami would give him 1000 points, unless the rounds preceeding the final aren't really a part of the Miami tournament... :rolleyes: :cuckoo:

Is it really so hard to understand that a masters final on its own may only be worth 400 points (because you've already gained 600 in that tournament by reaching the final), but a masters tournament is worth 1000 points?

"Winning a masters final is worth 400 points" - correct
"Winning a masters is worht 400 points" - incorrect

:wavey:

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 09:40 PM
Kindof Aspergersy, aren't you?

OMG, stop seeking revenge on me just because you feel :o being wrong! :bigcry:


Who's using anger as a defense mechanism now? :rolleyes:

:cuckoo:

samjones
01-26-2011, 09:41 PM
Don't get too cocky though. As I said, you might have a point, but only relatively speaking. What actually matters is how many points you will have on the ATP ranking board the next monday. Point differences between rounds are less relevant than the total amount of points one wins through a tournament. And winning the final match of a MS1000 means you ACTUALLY go home with a title and 1000 points. Winning the QF of a GS and losing the next match means you ACTUALLY go home with 720 points. What's better? I think it's pretty clear.

That's part of it. Cumulative is part of it. But what if you only got 100 points for winning the Major. Would you then argue that you're alot better off with 1300 than the guy who lost the Masters final and went home with paltry 600?

I'm only pointing out what I believe to be a limitation of the ATP scoring system. They curb back the multiples on the big wins which actually really benefits the better mediocre players - like Marin Cilic, or - at the expense of everyone else, including the up-and-comers. There's almost an invisible line in the ATP rankings. Once you cross that line of a combination of byes, seedings and a skewed rankings system will all but guarantee that you stay above that line as long as your able to hobble your old self out on to the court.

Do you agree with that at all?

samjones
01-26-2011, 09:42 PM
Masters. Why didn't you make poll?

I think they're for the gays. I never vote in them.

samjones
01-26-2011, 09:45 PM
"Winning a masters final is worth 400 points" - correct
"Winning a masters is worht 400 points" - incorrect



It's kindof nit-picky, because I was clearly talking about individual matches and I went on to clarify over and over again throughout this thread. You obviously understand the point I was making, but you continue to obsess over the one little piece that apparently bothered you.

Joolz
01-26-2011, 09:47 PM
You still don't get it. The OP doesn't mean the WTF. If you bothered to read his second post in this thread (it's on the first page ffs) you and everyone else would clearly understand what he means.

What I was trying to point out was that he got his numbers wrong, as far as the ranking points are concerned.

That was all that my comments were about - something you apparently didn't get. ;)

samjones
01-26-2011, 09:50 PM
What I was trying to point out was that he got his numbers wrong, as far as the ranking points are concerned.


Brick wall? Is that you?

JanKowalski
01-26-2011, 09:52 PM
What I was trying to point out was that he got his numbers wrong, as far as the ranking points are concerned.

That was all that my comments were about - something you apparently didn't get. ;)

And you still don't get it ... sigh.

EDIT: ninja'd

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 09:59 PM
It's kindof nit-picky, because I was clearly talking about individual matches and I went on to clarify over and over again throughout this thread. You obviously understand the point I was making, but you continue to obsess over the one little piece that apparently bothered you.

Well, it might be because you attacked those who misunderstood your OP because it was poorly worded by You and then refused to admit that your OP was poorly worded when I pointed this out to you. Instead you started attacking me simply for stating the obvious.

samjones
01-26-2011, 10:04 PM
Well, it might be because you attacked those who misunderstood your OP because it was poorly worded by You and then refused to admit that your OP was poorly worded when I pointed this out to you. Instead you started attacking me simply for stating the obvious.

I'm sure that your own inabilty to read and comprehend simple posts had nothing to do with it.

Mjau!
01-26-2011, 10:50 PM
I'm sure that your own inabilty to read and comprehend simple posts had nothing to do with it.

See, this is what I'm talking about. You are totally incapable of admitting fault, you attack those who merely highlight your glaring errors and you project your own feelings and inadequacies onto others. :o

It's pathetic!

Clydey
01-26-2011, 11:17 PM
Brick wall? Is that you?

It's not a coincidence that most of the people in the thread thinking you're spouting utter nonsense. There's no conspiracy here. You really are spouting utter nonsense.

samjones
01-27-2011, 01:07 AM
It's not a coincidence that most of the people in the thread thinking you're spouting utter nonsense. There's no conspiracy here. You really are spouting utter nonsense.

Most people have simply moved on because there's tired of talking about the topic. Only people like yourself who refuse to admit that you were dead wrong stay around. After all this time you can't simply accept the basic truth.

Masters Championship Win=400 points
Major QF Win=360

Clydey
01-27-2011, 03:16 AM
Most people have simply moved on because there's tired of talking about the topic. Only people like yourself who refuse to admit that you were dead wrong stay around. After all this time you can't simply accept the basic truth.

Masters Championship Win=400 points
Major QF Win=360

Pointless trying to reason with you.

Snowwy
01-27-2011, 03:21 AM
I see what you mean, but I think you really need to work on your literacy skills. I think they have the points correct, with slightly more points for winning a Masters series event.

samjones
01-27-2011, 11:07 AM
Pointless trying to reason with you.
I feel the same way about you, Sunshine.