Olympics point distribution. McEnroe thinks they should be the same as Slams [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Olympics point distribution. McEnroe thinks they should be the same as Slams

dencod16
08-05-2012, 07:45 AM
Do you think Olympics should award more points? At first i think they should and then i realized that it would be unfair to the likes of Granollers, Andujar, Ferrero, Llodra, because they would have not had the chance to compete for the points. What if there are 5 Spaniards in the top 10, the 5th ranked spaniard would be treated unfairly as he wouldn't have the chance to earn points.

I think it should stay the same or awards no points wherein no other tournaments are held the same week.

TennisOnWood
08-05-2012, 07:50 AM
Once in 4 years I think we can survive any points distribution

Glad this thing will be over today so MTF can go back to regular threads of mugs and hate

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 08:00 AM
It should award no points.

Pirata.
08-05-2012, 08:21 AM
It's fine as it is.

Honestly, I agree with AJ, it should have no points--players should be doing it to represent their country, not for personal glory, like how Davis Cup should have no points. Plus, the winner gets penalized in a way the following year when the points come off and aren't replaced until (if he even qualifies) for the next Olympiad.

Boris Franz Ecker
08-05-2012, 08:39 AM
should award zero points.
400 points or 800 what is is currently is laughable.

masterclass
08-05-2012, 08:49 AM
It should award no points.

It's fine as it is.

Honestly, I agree with AJ, it should have no points--players should be doing it to represent their country, not for personal glory, like how Davis Cup should have no points. Plus, the winner gets penalized in a way the following year when the points come off and aren't replaced until (if he even qualifies) for the next Olympiad.

I would agree wholeheartedly with this on one condition. The ATP would need to reschedule their events so that players who go deep at the Olympics or the respective surrounding tournaments aren't disadvantaged. 1 week off would be a condition. Playing for one's country shouldn't impede one's regular job.

We see what is happening now with Toronto.

Respectfully,
masterclass

n8
08-05-2012, 09:00 AM
It should definitely be worth points in my opinion. The rankings are supposed to reflect who are the better players.

1000 is too much because, as the OP pointed out, some players are excluded for reasons other than their ranking (unlike Masters1000).
500 is too little as the field and incentives are much higher than an ATP500.

750 is just right.

Featherer
08-05-2012, 11:18 AM
In every Olympic year several tournaments scheduled around the Olympics suffer.
If the Olympics would be awarded more ranking points it's logical, I think, that those tournaments would suffer even more.
Is that neccessary, given that the Olympics are not so attractive for their ranking points nor for money, but for winning for one's country and so on (as many forum members repeatedly pointed out)?

That said, the concerns the thread starter expresses may be even more compelling and it's thinkable that there would be a players lobby against the proposed changes.

It should award no points.
I actually agree with that.
It would be the best solution for the above mentioned tournaments as well as the mentioned affected players.

However, ranking points definitely generate an extra incentive for the players.
The players are not used anymore to play only for their home country (and prestige). Look at the DavisCup.
I can't say how severe the differences were, but without ranking points the Olympic tennis tournament wouldn't be as popular for the players as it is today!
The ATP decided to promote Tennis around the globe, at the cost of Marcel Granollers and others, who become victims for the "higher goal". (Although I personally don't like it.)
But well, 750 points is not so very much. It's like the happy medium in a way and seems quite sophisticated a decision by the ATP.

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 11:25 AM
It should definitely be worth points in my opinion. The rankings are supposed to reflect who are the better players.

1000 is too much because, as the OP pointed out, some players are excluded for reasons other than their ranking (unlike Masters1000).
500 is too little as the field and incentives are much higher than an ATP500.

750 is just right.

Are you serious? No other Olympic event awards points, lets say the athletics the Olympics performances do not go to the Diamond League which are their biggest events during the year.

Next of all these points can't be defended so what's the point of having them. In a sporting sense getting points for playing the Olympics and Davis Cup is awful. There are plenty of opportunities during the year to earn individual glory.

Ranking points does not make the Games any more prestigious and winning an Olympic medal is something no points can effectively measure and you'd find out soon enough which players would generally want to play if there were no points on offer.

Looner
08-05-2012, 11:26 AM
It should award no points.

Indeed.

AnnaK_4ever
08-05-2012, 11:41 AM
Since players can't make it to OG draw based strictly on their rankings there should be no points at all awarded at this event.

n8
08-05-2012, 11:56 AM
Are you serious? No other Olympic event awards points, lets say the athletics the Olympics performances do not go to the Diamond League which are their biggest events during the year.

Next of all these points can't be defended so what's the point of having them. In a sporting sense getting points for playing the Olympics and Davis Cup is awful. There are plenty of opportunities during the year to earn individual glory.

Ranking points does not make the Games any more prestigious and winning an Olympic medal is something no points can effectively measure and you'd find out soon enough which players would generally want to play if there were no points on offer.

I didn't know about other sports. That's interesting.

I know how you love hypothetical analysis (;)), so I'm going to use it in my argument. Say the world's top 2 have almost identical years (2 Slams each etc) and the year end ranking points without Olympics is 10,005 to 10,000. But the player with 10,000 ranking points won the Olympics. Surely he deserves to be world number one as everyone would say (correctly) that he had the better year.

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 12:00 PM
I didn't know about other sports. That's interesting.

I know how you love hypothetical analysis (;)), so I'm going to use it in my argument. Say the world's top 2 have almost identical years (2 Slams each etc) and the year end ranking points without Olympics is 10,005 to 10,000. But the player with 10,000 ranking points won the Olympics. Surely he deserves to be world number one as everyone would say (correctly) that he had the better year.

Straight out no. There is nothing that justifies points for the Olympic Games, as I said they can't be defended the next year and they can't have them last 4 years. If they need ranking points to get the top players to play the Games, then you know the status is flawed. Haas/Kafelnikov and Rosset/Arrese busting their arses over 5 sets only for the honour of winning gold for their countries, as I said it will never GS level, it's a unique event that can't be measured by points.

Year end number 1 is irrelevant it was only something Americans came up to justify at the time Sampras being the greatest ever. Consecutive weeks is a better indicator, so the hypothetical doesn't wash.

rocketassist
08-05-2012, 12:23 PM
Olympics shouldn't award any points.

It's not about ranking, it's about the achievement.

August
08-05-2012, 12:24 PM
750 points is good. If OG didn't give points, playing there wold lead missing points from somewhere, like Toronto this year. And even if there are no OG every year, you can "defend" your OG points by playing in other tournaments, like Canada you've possibly missed this year. And if you don't qualify to OG, you can get points easier than usual in tournaments like Washington this year.

IOFH
08-05-2012, 12:50 PM
It should award no points.

Agree with this. Olympics should be handled as a completely separated event from the regular ATP-tour.

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 12:53 PM
Agree with this. Olympics should be handled as a completely separated event from the regular ATP-tour.

ITF are the group than run the Games, but the ATP are the ones who stupidly for the reasons I stated decided to give points.

n8
08-05-2012, 12:58 PM
Straight out no. There is nothing that justifies points for the Olympic Games, as I said they can't be defended the next year and they can't have them last 4 years. If they need ranking points to get the top players to play the Games, then you know the status is flawed. Haas/Kafelnikov and Rosset/Arrese busting their arses over 5 sets only for the honour of winning gold for their countries, as I said it will never GS level, it's a unique event that can't be measured by points.

Year end number 1 is irrelevant it was only something Americans came up to justify at the time Sampras being the greatest ever. Consecutive weeks is a better indicator, so the hypothetical doesn't wash.

I was hoping you could see how my hypothetical could be extended for any week at number one (or any ranking place for that matter).

The ranking points are not primarily there to lure top players, they are there to make the ranking system fairer. I'm pretty sure Federer, Murray and Djokovic are not too fussed about the amount of points they are gaining this week. The points reduce the chance of hearing something like 'he's the real number one' etc.

I realise there are valid arguments against Olympic ranking points, but they're not enough for me to change my mind. The poll is for Olympic points.

Ivanatis
08-05-2012, 12:59 PM
yes they should award points, but giving less than for a 1000-win is even worse than giving no points

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 01:04 PM
I was hoping you could see how my hypothetical could be extended for any week at number one (or any ranking place for that matter).

The ranking points are not primarily there to lure top players, they are there to make the ranking system fairer. I'm pretty sure Federer, Murray and Djokovic are not too fussed about the amount of points they are gaining this week. The points reduce the chance of hearing something like 'he's the real number one' etc.

I realise there are valid arguments against Olympic ranking points, but they're not enough for me to change my mind. The poll is for Olympic points.

Considering the Olympics shouldn't have any ranking points, a hypothetical argument isn't going to change my mind. Guarantee no ranking points not all of the top guys would turn up. How is it fair for a guy who is ranked 30th but can't get in because he is 5th in his own country?

There shouldn't be any distribution. If they are so sure about their product then they don't need the points, the athletics example is clear enough.

n8
08-05-2012, 01:17 PM
Considering the Olympics shouldn't have any ranking points, a hypothetical argument isn't going to change my mind. Guarantee no ranking points not all of the top guys would turn up. How is it fair for a guy who is ranked 30th but can't get in because he is 5th in his own country?

There shouldn't be any distribution. If they are so sure about their product then they don't need the points, the athletics example is clear enough.

Isn't that a point for my side of the argument? Don't we want more top players? Sure, players want to represent their country, but they shouldn't have to do that at the expense of their careers (missing out on ranking points). It's not like athletic stars are missing out on anything by competing in London.

However your next point is the strongest one against ranking points for Olympic tennis. I agree with that one for sure.

Hessian_J
08-05-2012, 02:10 PM
Are the results even going to factor into the Wimbledon seedings for next year?

bjurra
08-05-2012, 02:36 PM
I think the current system is good.

Players ranked 60-200 need all the points they can get and should not be penalized for playing the Olympics instead of some MM ATP event.

Juz78
08-05-2012, 02:37 PM
All the people here saying it should worth no points should consider that playing the Olympics would mean losing out on points they could have received from ATP tournaments during the OG week.

Why penalise a player valuable ranking points they could have received because they are called up to represent their country?

Having it worth 750 points also gives incentive to certain selfish players *cough* Sampras *cough* that are only in it for the money/points. At least having them play makes a more competitive tournament for the viewers

rafa_maniac
08-05-2012, 02:43 PM
I think it's fine as is. The points aren't reflective of its value either way (no player in the right mind would trade a 750 point Gold Medal for a 1000 point Canada title) but at least this way it's not actively detrimental to play them as it would be if they were worth 0 or impossible to defend by playing other 500s/250s as they would be if given, say, 1500 points.

dencod16
08-05-2012, 03:20 PM
Are the results even going to factor into the Wimbledon seedings for next year?

Not sure, but probably. cause even the challengers in grass plays a part in the seedings.

bouncer7
08-05-2012, 03:39 PM
It should be at least 3000 points, its not matter all at once or 4 years x 750 point.

sexybeast
08-05-2012, 04:29 PM
Who cares really? I mean, the tennis calendar is richer with the olympics, everyone enjoyed this tournament more than they would Washington 500, nitpicking about if it is fair to give points or not is just a waste of time.

I would rather question how you get 500 winning Memphis, Washington and Hamburg beating absolutely no one than a tournament where you need to beat 2 alltime greats to win 750 points.

We have enjoyed this week of tennis, it has been better than your avarage master 1000 and most want it to stay that way for 2016. In fact they should give 1250 points next Olympics, it is all fun to break the repetition year after year and have such an exotic tournament right between Wimbledon and Usopen.

amirbachar
08-05-2012, 05:05 PM
Are you serious? No other Olympic event awards points, lets say the athletics the Olympics performances do not go to the Diamond League which are their biggest events during the year.


That is simply not true.
I know that in Judo and sailing the Olympics gives more points than any other tournament.
In Volleyball it is equal to World Championships and world cup.
In Basketball, the Olympics are a sole Criteria for seeding in European and World Championships.
I bet that Athletics are the Exception of the rule.

hewitt2002
08-05-2012, 07:12 PM
Did anyone else hear John McEnroe & Tim Henman talking on BBC saying the Olympics should carry the same ranking points as the 4 majors? McEnroe was talking as if it would happen in the future. Any thoughts on this? Would it be a good idea? Or does it devalue the slams?

SheepleBuster
08-05-2012, 07:13 PM
I don't know why they let drunk people on TV. I think Olympics should be discontinued as an event. It is a joke event.

LastRocket
08-05-2012, 07:14 PM
If Olympics draw had 128 players and best of 5 sets, then yes. But that won't happen so NO!

IOFH
08-05-2012, 07:15 PM
One more reason for me to not to take anything he says seriously.

tennisfan856
08-05-2012, 07:15 PM
I'd respect him more if he said it should be eliminated completely.

EddieNero
08-05-2012, 07:15 PM
Mac going nuts as the time passes.

Chris Kuerten
08-05-2012, 07:17 PM
McEnroe is a clown, our own autistic basement dwellers on MTF know it better, right :shrug:?

IOFH
08-05-2012, 07:18 PM
McEnroe is a clown, our own autistic basement dwellers on MTF know it better, right :shrug:?

Right.

Action Jackson
08-05-2012, 07:19 PM
Mac said Nadal is the best volleyer on tour and all Slams should have 5th set tiebreakers.

Sanya
08-05-2012, 07:19 PM
2000 points which you can`t defend in 52 weeks, brilliant. :rolleyes:

EddieNero
08-05-2012, 07:20 PM
Mac said Nadal is the best volleyer on tour and all Slams should have 5th set tiebreakers.

:haha: :haha: RICH

Poirot123
08-05-2012, 07:20 PM
Maconroe is a tennis great. But as a pundit he has the tendency to jump on band wagons and big up the immediate thing. The next guy outside of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic to win a slam will be proclaimed the new GOAT and be bigged up beyond all sense of proportion.

MTwEeZi
08-05-2012, 07:21 PM
Mac said Nadal is the best volleyer on tour and all Slams should have 5th set tiebreakers.

:haha: :haha: RICH

Yeah, what could McEnroe know about volleys :rolleyes:

MuzzahLovah
08-05-2012, 07:33 PM
Yes of course, it is only once every four years and as tennis grows world wide it will be more and more important. I agree with j Mac.

MuzzahLovah
08-05-2012, 07:35 PM
Mac said Nadal is the best volleyer on tour and all Slams should have 5th set tiebreakers.

Final set tbs would be good as well

Aloevera
08-05-2012, 07:36 PM
OG is never meant to work like GS, so how can it have 2000 ranking points... McEnroe loves to overhype stuff as usual.

finishingmove
08-05-2012, 07:38 PM
Don't know, but Slams should award medals.

Jimnik
08-05-2012, 09:27 PM
If by "majors" he means Masters 1000.

KarlyM
08-05-2012, 11:29 PM
No. I would go with masters level points at most, not slam level.

rocketassist
08-05-2012, 11:49 PM
Mac is a bandwagon hopper and anything he says take with a pinch of bath salt.

Looner
08-05-2012, 11:56 PM
I am distressed at the thinks part in the title.

jrm
08-06-2012, 12:04 AM
Once in 4 years I think we can survive any points distribution

:yeah:

Action Jackson
08-06-2012, 12:24 AM
Isn't that a point for my side of the argument? Don't we want more top players? Sure, players want to represent their country, but they shouldn't have to do that at the expense of their careers (missing out on ranking points). It's not like athletic stars are missing out on anything by competing in London.

However your next point is the strongest one against ranking points for Olympic tennis. I agree with that one for sure.

No it isn't actually. If they need the incentive of ranking points to play for their country once every 4 years then that defeats the purpose of what the Games are allegedly about.

Actually the athletics stars miss out big time if they don't compete at the Olympics unlike tennis this is all the Grand Slams rolled into one.

Tommy_Vercetti
08-06-2012, 12:31 AM
McEnroe's opinions have been proven absolutely worthless. See Donald Young.

The Olympics should award no points in the same way that it awards no money. The prestige should be enough.

branimir_iliev
08-06-2012, 12:46 AM
Keep it as is, imo. More points and you risk inflating the rankings based on something that is too anomalous in terms of timing, relative situation (with other pro tourneys) and preparation. Less points and rabid nationalists who might not earn prestige anywhere else start whining about 'disrespect' and 'honor'. This way we have a happy middle ground. Not too inflated and not too insignificant.

As for J Mac. He needs to sleep it off, whatever it is from whatever cocktail party he was at last night. You know, sometimes his mouth opens up and stuff comes out. Some of his more outlandish claims are the effort of an old champ to stay relevant in current events. So take it with a grain of salt..

v-money
08-06-2012, 12:48 AM
Glad this thing will be over today so MTF can go back to regular threads of mugs and hate

This.

I didn't even bother to read more of this thread.

Rafa is the GOAT
08-06-2012, 09:13 AM
Johny Mac said it yesterday, is it really true?

Chirag
08-06-2012, 09:14 AM
I so hope not :facepalm:

Andy1402
08-06-2012, 09:20 AM
I really hope not. It's unfair to the winner, because the points drop in a year and the player is suddenly down 2000 points.

dencod16
08-06-2012, 09:39 AM
That's his opinion not a fact, they haven't even discussed the 2012 point distribution when it was 2008.

clokey34
08-06-2012, 10:27 AM
I really hope not. It's unfair to the winner, because the points drop in a year and the player is suddenly down 2000 points.

I don't get this logic. That is a negative way of looking at it. The winner gets a big boost in ranking for the year.

Are you saying the less points the better?

scoobs
08-06-2012, 10:28 AM
It won't do.

He said in his opinion it should do.

I doubt it will be anything like 2000 points in the end but it may be reviewed.

acionescu
08-06-2012, 10:29 AM
I hope not :o

clokey34
08-06-2012, 10:32 AM
IMO they should be worth 1500. Masters<Olympics<Slam

Andy1402
08-06-2012, 10:44 AM
I don't get this logic. That is a negative way of looking at it. The winner gets a big boost in ranking for the year.

Are you saying the less points the better?

It may be a negative way of looking at the issue, but it is a valid POV.
Suddenly being 2000 points down may let an opponent who went out in the 1st round of the Olympics overtake you. Not fair, is it?

Pratik
08-06-2012, 11:05 AM
He said that they should, not they will

manadrainer
08-06-2012, 11:35 AM
Fed thinks they should award 0 points.

http://www.ubitennis.com/english/sport/tennis/2012/08/05/754452-roger_federer_2012.shtml

coluta
08-06-2012, 11:40 AM
Almost :)

Q. You've been through a bunch of these now. How should we view the Olympics and the Olympics gold medal compared to the majors? Where does it rank? How do you see it?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, it's unique in so many ways, you know. It's supposed to be that way. I almost believe there should be no points at the Olympics, to be quite honest, because it's not fair for some of the players who can't play the tournament for the reasons you know. There's only four players per country allowed to play per country. Plus we have a tournament running at the same time in Washington that almost gives the same amount of points. So it's a bit odd. That's why I'm almost in favor of not having any points at the Olympics.
But the importance to me it's as big as tournaments that are out there. Similar to a World Tour Finals, where unfortunately we don't play the best-of-five-set finals there anymore, or a Grand Slam. It's as high up as the big tournaments. And obviously making it best-of-three in the early rounds, you know, makes the margins more small, particularly on grass.
The grass has been different this time around because of the seeding. It was slippery in the beginning, then dry again. The played very different.

AntiTennis
08-06-2012, 11:49 AM
Uhm I think should not awards points, the prize is play for your country.

buzz
08-06-2012, 12:00 PM
No points would be best I think, in line with olympic spirits and fair for a countries no5.

decrepitude
08-06-2012, 12:08 PM
I agree with no points - but there should be NO other top-level tournament the same week. Also unfair if players who qualify for Olympics can opt out to play a points-scoring tournament.

TBkeeper
08-06-2012, 12:50 PM
Olympics are a mug tournament :shrug: i see no problem here ? Whatever the points whatever the nation whatever the money Mug event is mug event...

Lazyking
08-06-2012, 12:58 PM
no points.