Do you think ATP should use the Entry list as the only ranking? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Do you think ATP should use the Entry list as the only ranking?

rhz
07-29-2002, 05:26 AM
That Championship Race is not relevant at all! you could not use that as a ranking, it is only the race to reach the final championship! look at the ATP website, the link to the Entry list is really well hidden so then people might think that whoever is #1 according to the Race is the real #1
:mad: :mad:

tazban1
07-29-2002, 06:08 AM
I agree. I can't stand the Champions race as being considered the rankings. I think the entry system should be the official ranking and the champions race can be used as an aide.

harry_potter
07-29-2002, 06:22 AM
same here. i mean, after thomas johansson won the aus. open, he was ranked no. 1 on the champions race! ridiculous, or what!

TheBoiledEgg
07-29-2002, 09:22 AM
the ESP is the ranks and i don't give a damn about the CR
thats of little use until all the Masters events are completed

Layla
07-29-2002, 09:36 AM
I like the race, it's exciting. :D

Think of it as a marathon. Some players have an early start only to lose steam in the later stages and others are late bloomers, peaking in the second part of the race and overtaking the earlier hotshots. Still others run at an even pace, hovering about the same spot throughout the race, while some are really erratic and keep slowing down and accelerating.

It's all a lot of fun, if one doesn't take it too seriously. The only real rankings are determined by the entry system, that's for sure.

Maybe the official ATP site does overdo it. For a long time, I had no idea they showed entry system as well, and had to go to another site to follow the weekly changes in ranks and points. :rolleyes:

Angele
07-29-2002, 11:21 AM
The Champions Race is ok if you know about the Entry System. When I first started watching tennis and the only men's rankings I saw was the CR I was totally confused because the seedings in tournaments weren't according to those rankings. Now that I know they're both there I'm glad it's there cuz it helps me keep track of how Lleyton My favorites are doing :D

harry_potter
07-29-2002, 11:23 AM
and i wonder who ur favourites r... ;) or should i say, i wonder who ur favourite is? :D

Angele
07-29-2002, 11:28 AM
:p

harry_potter
07-29-2002, 11:28 AM
ur location gives u away ;)

Dissident
07-29-2002, 02:11 PM
The Champs Race is ok. I like the idea of being able to follow it closely. BUT, as the others, I cant give up on following the Entry System, as it is the true ranking.
What I dislike on the Champions Race is the way the ATP tries to make it as if it was the only ranking there. Well, it can make things simplier for the newbies of the sport, but it make it all so stupid for the ones who are following it since long.
They could treat both equally. That would make sense.

Layla
07-29-2002, 03:37 PM
Indeed.

TennisHack
07-30-2002, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by hitman
The Champs Race is ok. I like the idea of being able to follow it closely. BUT, as the others, I cant give up on following the Entry System, as it is the true ranking.
What I dislike on the Champions Race is the way the ATP tries to make it as if it was the only ranking there. Well, it can make things simplier for the newbies of the sport, but it make it all so stupid for the ones who are following it since long.
They could treat both equally. That would make sense.

Basically, what hitman says, but with one change: I don't like the Champions Race because it seems like the past year's accomplishments don't count. The ESP is the only thing for me, it's the only ranking I keep track of on my site.

*~ The Leopard ~*
07-30-2002, 07:29 AM
The Champions Race is useful as a check against the rankings. It enables you to get an idea quickly of who is on the way up or down if form continues.

That's about all. The way it's used by the ATP is crap.

bcoene
07-30-2002, 07:36 PM
It's usefull to see who has done well this year but I agree that the entry system is the most important ranking.
If someone is ranked 30 for example in the CR then I think, if he competes like this all year he will be ranked 30 in the entry system, but it can be totaly different as wel.

Sonic
07-30-2002, 10:15 PM
The Champs race = the entry points earnt at event divided by 5.

e.g. 1000 entry points for grand slam, 200 race points.

They might as well just have a race to champs and have done with it.

dbc
07-30-2002, 10:38 PM
It has to been the Entry System for the rankings as that shows a players performance over the whole year.
If you used the Championship Race for seedings can you just imagine the chaos. Remember a couple of years ago Santoro was no. 1 leading into the Australian Open.

Catriel
11-24-2002, 02:21 AM
The race doesn´t take care about the challengers. That is unfair.
And you can´t say who is the #1 looking at this.

If we have 2 rankings, I think that Entry System must be the MAIN ranking, and the Race just for joy

Scotso
11-24-2002, 04:05 AM
Sorry, but I agree with the ATP. To avid tennis fans this might matter to, it really shouldn't because we know the difference.

To non-avid fans, this is more exciting and understandable for them.

Chloe le Bopper
11-24-2002, 04:10 AM
After three years of it - it is convenient going into the masters cup to calculate what people need to end the year in the top 5 or whatever, if you just use the race.

It isn't hard either way - but for that purpose it was useful

TheBoiledEgg
11-24-2002, 05:05 AM
the ESP ranks is on the ATP site under Media link in a pdf format

the Players always use the Entry rank, even when its down to near end of season they still check that 1st.

claudine140
11-24-2002, 07:30 AM
i think the two lists have there good sides.
the entrylist gives an image how a player does it during his carreer, during many years. But i don't like the fact they can loose points the next year (if they don't do so good in a particular tournement)
the championrace gives an image about what a player does in one year, just like the football rankings.
But indeed they must show both rankings together as eaguals.
But at the end of the year both lists are very likely, especially the top ten. But not for upcoming players, but it is good to look what their position is among players who are a couple of year on the circuit when you compair both lists.
Claudine

maratski
11-24-2002, 07:39 PM
I don't like the CR either. For me the entry system is still the list. I think that also the players still see it that way. I think it means more when you're n.1 on the entry system than on the CR. I liked seeing Younes el Aynaoui being the first morrocan n.1 in the world (CR), but it's not his real ranking.

Catriel
11-26-2002, 04:47 AM
Tell me WHO is the #1 of the world after Australian Open.
Or better, tell me during the week of Australian Open....

The Champions Race......... has no sense.
You have to look the Entry System to see who each player is.

esther
11-26-2002, 06:25 AM
yeah i think the CR is good for people that actually know what's going on and if people realise that the entry system is the one that actually matters like i remember when hewitt won Adelaide and they're like 'oh how does it feel to be number one' when it was just the CR and it just confuses people!! i think the entry system should be more *publicized*, if that makes sense...like make the entry system the main system of saying who's ranked where and dont really pay too much attention to the champions race until the end...

Nimi
11-26-2002, 07:02 PM
The Champions race is just exciting.
You can see who is hot & who is not.

Plus they are doing such a fabulous job of promoting that & the TMC.

TheBoiledEgg
11-26-2002, 08:25 PM
but its pointless publishing that as the main source of the ranking system until at least Wimbledon is over.

J. Corwin
11-27-2002, 03:24 AM
I agree that atp should use esp as the main rankings instead of the overlypromoted and advertised champions race.

Heck, I like the WTA rankings system better...with the quality points, etc.:p

Chloe le Bopper
11-27-2002, 04:05 AM
It confuses casual fans.

You know how many times I had to explain to this one why "who the hell Thomas Johanson" was and why he was number one, and "where was Agassi"?

*in Feburary*

Jorge
11-27-2002, 05:13 PM
yeah the champion race is a bad invent, everybody knows that it doesn't reflects the real ranking til the last part of the season. And at the end if you check the entry system and the champions race after Shanghai, the positions are exactly the same!.

btw Wimbledon should respect the entry system to seed the players, too

Experimentee
11-29-2002, 01:42 PM
I dont like how the CR is treated like the real rankings when it really isnt...I mean Santoro won the first tournament of the year and they were calling him the World No.1, it was quite ridiculous.
They should use the Race like how the WTA uses it, keep the Entry System but keep the race in the background to determine the year end championships.