TT Changes 2013 - Page 2 - MensTennisForums.com

MensTennisForums.com

MenstennisForums.com is the premier Men's Tennis forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.Please Register - It's Free!

Reply

Old 10-26-2012, 08:24 PM   #16
country flag Cava
Registered User
 
Cava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 36
Posts: 2,537
Cava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond reputeCava has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
First of all, thanks for all the suggestions We're now proceeding to the next step of the changes period. This thread will be used to discuss the topics which were brought up in the suggestions thread.

The suggestions are ordered by numbers. You can vote/discuss each of the topics and also reply to posts of other players.

It's not necessary to vote for all the topics, but the players' participation is important for a decision/change to be made.

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:

No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)


13) Standardizing the OOP:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No ONLY IN GS & MASTERS EVENTS(Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win) YES?


20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?


21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? NO NO NO
I especially feel like #4 should remain no restrictions. If you don't accept LE for SE, it punishes lower ranked players that have success when taking a 1 week shot at an ATP event.

I didn't answer the TB Questions b/c TB makes my head hurt....
__________________
TT Singles 62 <> TT Doubles 101 <> PAW 30 <> Suicide 26 <> DTT (W: 2012 AUS OPEN)
Cava is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 10-26-2012, 08:52 PM   #17
country flag CoolyBri
Registered User
 
CoolyBri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,381
CoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond reputeCoolyBri has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

My opinions in blue:

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes. A player shouldn't be punished for success in singles or doubles when his other ranking iss too low to get direct entry.

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)
No, if qualifying points are introduced (what I support).

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?
Players should be able to commit early, but should be out of QD and MD when they are still alive in the Slam on Saturday.


4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
I'd say no restrictions for anyone whose rankings isn't high enough to get direct entry.
Someone with a high ranking who only forgot to commit shouldn't be able to get an SE.


5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?
One player is enough, that way it's far easier for the manager. But the commitment should be clear. No question marks or something like that.

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)
No. Everybody should have the time to commit in the 10 days before the first deadline.


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?
No restrictions.

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Absolutely not.


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
I'd say no. Maybe one can add something like "when the person who posted the OOP forwards the picks to the manager before the deadline they are counted", but there is no need for that person to do so. That would be a chance for the players who read the OOP wrong, if they are lucky.

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)
Yes.

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
No.


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)
No. Managers usually create a good amount of matches for the first round and I trust all of them to keep doing that without additional rules.

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?
No. That's always something I enjoy most while managing. My choices are often bad, but that's the players bad luck Everyone has the same chance anyway.


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)
Yes. I think that's a really great idea.

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
No. The order of the OOP is mostly luck anyway, so that order should remain the same. Everyone has the same number of winners and SRs anyway when it's used.

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?

GD should be used as the PTS system. It's less luck about who serves first (obviously it's luck, too; but at least a little bit less).


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Yes. Absolutely.

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)
I like that idea, most high ranked players play with the same partner most of the year anyway, that way you can avoid to tear teams apart for WTF because one of the players didn't have time to play in maybe only one week.


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?
No.

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?
Managers first. I always like managing (and playing!) tournaments with unknown players, so they should be used if they suit the available managers.

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
No.
CoolyBri is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 09:12 AM   #18
country flag Mahqz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Age: 29
Posts: 3,823
Mahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond reputeMahqz has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

My Answers in red.

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)
But qualifying and a CH in the same week shouldn't be possible.

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:

No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Random is random. This is fun of the game


SENDING PICKS


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)


13) Standardizing the OOP:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Read in Jims post and added to mine: ...but would change to yes if standardized OOP adopted.

16) PTS:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)
Yes, but only in ATP Main Tour tournaments

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?

No

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?


21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?

No
__________________
TT Singles: W 2014: Heilbronn I
TT Singles: W 2013: Marseille, Sarasota
TT Singles: W 2012: Blois Fut; QF USO
TT Singles ranking: 57 (High: 52)

TT Doubles: W 2013: Winston-Salem, Sarajevo; SF USO (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles: W 2012: Antalya, Tiburon; SF USO (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles: W 2011: Izmir CH (w/ appleGirl)
TT Doubles ranking: 42 (High: 39)


-- TT Board Member --

Last edited by Mahqz : 10-27-2012 at 05:18 PM.
Mahqz is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 02:10 PM   #19
country flag Goldenoldie
Registered User
 
Goldenoldie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: No fixed abode
Age: 70
Posts: 9,107
Goldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond reputeGoldenoldie has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

First priority is to thank Murilo for taking all the various suggestions and getting them into a logical order ready for voting.


COMMITMENTS

I believe the over-riding principle should be that if you can't be in 2 places at once in real life you can't be in 2 places in TT

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)but they cannot commit to the challenger until their GS result is known. This probably means they would only be able to play the challenger MD and not the QD

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded? I believe in anything which makes the manager's life simpler

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No. Definitely not. The luck of the draw is the luck of the draw (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes, but only if the "wrong" person is able and willing to forward them to the manager before the deadline. The manager should not have to wait till the OOP poster is online to find out if they have received picks for X,Y,Z/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook????? You must be joking? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No. No specific punishment, but NAME AND SHAME, so that potential doubles partners can be aware. Someone would need to keep an up-to-date tally of the number of times each player has defaulted. I would volunteer if this suggestion is adopted. (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions. Each tournament has its own schedule, and managers try to do whatever is fairest?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?, provided the TB system is also changed


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No. This would either need new software from Evita or manual calculation. If Evita could incorporate it without any difficulty then I would be in favour. (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No while the OOP is in theoretical order of difficulty, but would change to yes if standardized OOP adopted. (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines? Yes, this was my suggestion anyway
GD should be used as the PTS system? Honestly don't know. Some managers have difficulty deciding matches on PTS, and GD is even more complicated. I agree with those who claim GD rewards accuracy better.


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes. Absolutely yes, especially for newcomers this would be be an incentive. Extra work for Gav though./No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No. Not everyone is lucky enough to have a regular partner. (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? Yes

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones? No quarrel with the present arrangement. Marto and Labamba have done a good job

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? When I managed I accepted picks up to 5 minutes late, because I was never sure that my old slow computer was showing exactly the correct time. I have no problem with a little flexibility, but I have no problem if the decision is to go for 100% strictness either.
__________________
M. T. F.
The biggest source of bullshit since cattle were domesticated.
Goldenoldie is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 03:07 PM   #20
country flag ibreak4coffee
Moderator
 
ibreak4coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 6,575
ibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond reputeibreak4coffee has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vilnietė View Post
Since we are already using the shootout system, this means that both players picked the same number of correct winners and correct SRs. So the winner depends only on the TT OOP (which is subjective). I don't think that the player who guessed the correct winner in a match with a higher priority is better than the player who gave more credit to the winner in a match where both players failed to guess the winner.

I don't see why guessing the correct winner in a "more competative" match but failing to guess who wins a "less competative" one is a better result than the opposite.
Well the rule will stay the same but it's hilarious we are deciding to reward getting something wrong rather than getting something right. Imagine if betting markets allowed punters to win this way - or any other system allowed people to win based on getting it wrong. There should be no reward for "almost" guessing a result correctly over correctly picking a winner.

This rule is particularly flawed for Grand Slams where straight set matches are far less common. But the crowd is happy with it so enjoy!
ibreak4coffee is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 06:32 PM   #21
country flag lolada_4
Registered User
 
lolada_4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Age: 17
Posts: 822
lolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond reputelolada_4 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

My Answers in red

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

Only when they are out

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? Yes

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones? Entry list

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? Of course yes! If the matches don´t start and the only at 5 minutes later, picks shoul be count! have no problem with a little flexibility. Because it´s a game and it´s to have fun . And sometimes when I need to study I only start choose 5/10 before the deadline and sometimes send picks 2 minutes after the deadline and don´t count.
lolada_4 is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 06:57 PM   #22
country flag mateusz2904
Registered User
 
mateusz2904's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Kielce
Age: 21
Posts: 1,063
mateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond reputemateusz2904 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes Maybe it's not realistic, but we don't need more complications.

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
No

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD?

4) Late entries & SE's:
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE.

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
No


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions.

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
No


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
No

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
No


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds
no restrictions

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
No

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
No

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? No

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? No
__________________
JAMES BLAKE
Krajinovic Federer Dimitrov Raonic Tipsarevic Wawrinka

"It's one of those wonderful correlations between tennis and life: the only way to succeed where you've failed before is not to dwell on the past, but to keep your mind on the task before you"JB

TT SINGLES: 11 Salzburg'10, Barletta'11, Umag'11, Winston-Salem'11, Marseille'12, Nice'12
TT DOUBLES: 12 Bergamo'11, Nottingham (2)'11, Basel'11, Marseille'12, Indian Wells'12, Saint Brieuc'12, Umag'12, Beijing'12, Tyumen'12, Miami'13
mateusz2904 is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 07:24 PM   #23
country flag savesthedizzle
#freeviktor
 
savesthedizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: formerly known as Troickitard
Posts: 93,311
savesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Taking some time out of hurricane prep to start with this

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)


Yes. There is no air travel in TT and not allowing this only penalizes lower ranked players for actually having a successful week by then costing them a week of play.

Quote:
2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Quote:

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)


No if qualifying points are introduced.

Quote:
3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
Quote:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?


Players should be able to commit only after they're out.

Quote:
4) Late entries & SE's:
Quote:

No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?


Current rule is fine.

Quote:
5) Doubles commitments:
Quote:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?


This is tricky, and I'm someone who has been committing my doubles partner all year with him maybe confirming half the time For us, it worked because we always played together, but I do understand the confusion of people who are trying to pair up. I'm okay with requiring confirmation. When we originally had this rule put in place, it was for people who are trying to see if they can make main draw in one tournament over another and may not have had time to get their doubles partner to also commit before the deadline. I'm not sure how much people still entry list watch. You can't hold regular partners to one standard and those who pair up week to week to another. I think whatever the majority wants here is fine with me.

Quote:
6) Singles commitments by another person?
Quote:

Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


I think this is okay This is mainly doubles partners committing their partner, maybe the partner is on vacation or something.


Quote:
DRAWS
Quote:


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


#8, I mean, it sucks, but that's too much draw manipulation for my taste.


Quote:
SENDING PICKS
Quote:


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


No. I understand the position of the other side here for sure, but it is important to read the directions when you're sending.

Quote:
10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Quote:

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)


Yes, in the case where MTF is having database errors, etc.

Quote:
11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Quote:

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


I would support some sort of warning system for habitual offenders. Everyone has something come up once in a while.. power outage, trip to hospital, family emergency... but this should be rare. A first time warning, second time penalty, type system I think would be fine. In singles, sure these people are replaced by LLs in the first round or alts in qualifying, but their doubles partner gets screwed.


Quote:
OOP
Quote:


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)


I'm not really fond of split OOPs where there are 1 or 2 matches on Tuesday as part of the first round and the rest are second round. Then the manager has to be around to post a second set of differences after first round winners are known etc. I think this should be done as infrequently as possible. TT SF rounds are always decided by just 4 matches, I would say that's a satisfactory minimum to have for any round.

Quote:
13) Standardizing the OOP:
Quote:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


I like this idea if the spreadsheet can be adapted to do this for managers. Sometimes I will admit, I have been over some of the OOPs and what matches managers select for SR1 or SR2 that seem pretty obvious. The idea is that the more difficult matches are at the top of the OOP, so I don't like the idea of top to bottom or left to right at all, that's totally random.


Quote:
TB System
Quote:


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no)


I'm not sure I understand what this is asking... maybe I missed a discussion somewhere I need to look into that explains this better....

Quote:
15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Quote:

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


Hmm, I say yes here. I think it's better to reward being right about something than to reward being slightly less wrong.


Quote:
16) PTS:
Quote:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


Yes I hate PTS
GD > PTS

I'm all for no more PTS in TT! This has been my platform for 5 years now Go play PTS, you PTS lovers


Quote:
RANKING POINTS
Quote:


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


I think yes, there should be.

Quote:
18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Quote:

Yes/No (Current rule: no)


In the past I've always said no, even though I like playing with regular partners. In general, regular partners do qualify together, but for a while this year mcarvalho/Machado and Bibberz and myself were 1/3 and 2/4 in the rankings, Bibberz and I only played apart I think one week out of this entire year and it was enough to create that little bit of space. Of course, all four of us in this example are in the WTF this year, but if we were a little lower in the rankings and one of the four of us didn't get in... BUT I don't like excluding people who have a lot of good results but don't have a regular partner. I still lean no But... my mind is a little bit torn on this. My official vote is no, but it's a weak no.


OTHERS


Quote:
19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?


Sure.

Quote:
20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?


I will leave this for people who it affects most to decide I would say quality > diversity of timezones but I would say it should be up to managers for what events they can manage and what events those players are most interested in playing.

Quote:
21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
No, absolutely not, it's a slippery slope. If you start accepting picks 1 min late, then people will say "Oh but I was only 2 minutes late" "Oh but I was only 1 minute later than the 1 minute late that's allowed" Just, no. Send on time, you get several hours to do so, there's no need to be sending at the last second
__________________
Troicki - Djokovic - Del Potro - Berankis - Halebian - Peliwo
Cibulkova - Robson - Kirilenko - Azarenka
Retired but always loving Ferrero - Ancic - Kiefer

savesthedizzle is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 08:04 PM   #24
country flag Freak3yman84
Registered User
 
Freak3yman84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 10,669
Freak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by savesthedizzle View Post
#8, I mean, it sucks, but that's too much draw manipulation for my taste
This is out of line. You may disagree with that idea, but what you said is unnecessarily harsh. Personally, I find no fun playing my doubles partner. It's perfectly fine that you disagree with it, but saying it sucks is offending.
__________________
Oh Sheesh Y'all, 'Twas A Dream

Number of Times I've Cried Over Sucking at FITD: All but four

W Samarkand Singles W Charlottesville W Lermontov W ATP Bastad W Bol Fut (w/MathMul)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kuerten View Post
Freakyman is a mythical figure who went bat shit insane during the 2012 ACC and got himself permbanned and the whole ACC with him.

He then forced an unban by sleeping with the entire moderation crew and these days you can see him post in a mellowed down version, while being under the influence of strong medication.
Freak3yman84 is online now View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 08:44 PM   #25
country flag erickmartins
Not exactly average.
 
erickmartins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Coventry
Age: 28
Posts: 1,035
erickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond reputeerickmartins has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

it sucks = "playing against your doubles partner sucks". Try a bit harder before being too harsh yourself
__________________
TT Rankings - Singles: 292 (best 13) / Doubles: 271 (best 165)

Titles: Astana 2 CH '11, Challenger Tour Finals '11, Kuala Lumpur '12 (w/Dudisela75), Bressuire Futures '13 (w/Marita)

Finals: Fürth CH '11, Orleans CH '11, Petange CH '12, TT Euro '12 (w/Vilnietč)

SF: Australian Open '12, Memphis '12
erickmartins is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 08:48 PM   #26
country flag savesthedizzle
#freeviktor
 
savesthedizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: formerly known as Troickitard
Posts: 93,311
savesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond reputesavesthedizzle has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak3yman84 View Post
This is out of line. You may disagree with that idea, but what you said is unnecessarily harsh. Personally, I find no fun playing my doubles partner. It's perfectly fine that you disagree with it, but saying it sucks is offending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erickmartins View Post
it sucks = "playing against your doubles partner sucks". Try a bit harder before being too harsh yourself
I meant that it sucks playing your partner not that the idea to manipulate the draw sucks. I'm not a mean person Sorry if it was unclear I have played my doubles partners many many many times Trust me that I know it's no fun, I feel qualified to say that playing your doubles partner sucks but that there's nothing you can do about it really That's all I meant
__________________
Troicki - Djokovic - Del Potro - Berankis - Halebian - Peliwo
Cibulkova - Robson - Kirilenko - Azarenka
Retired but always loving Ferrero - Ancic - Kiefer

savesthedizzle is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 09:02 PM   #27
country flag sdtoot
Registered User
 
sdtoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,745
sdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond reputesdtoot has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? No

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? No
sdtoot is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 11:09 PM   #28
country flag Freak3yman84
Registered User
 
Freak3yman84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 10,669
Freak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond reputeFreak3yman84 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by erickmartins View Post
it sucks = "playing against your doubles partner sucks". Try a bit harder before being too harsh yourself
Quote:
Originally Posted by savesthedizzle View Post
I meant that it sucks playing your partner not that the idea to manipulate the draw sucks. I'm not a mean person Sorry if it was unclear I have played my doubles partners many many many times Trust me that I know it's no fun, I feel qualified to say that playing your doubles partner sucks but that there's nothing you can do about it really That's all I meant
Misunderstanding, sorry!
__________________
Oh Sheesh Y'all, 'Twas A Dream

Number of Times I've Cried Over Sucking at FITD: All but four

W Samarkand Singles W Charlottesville W Lermontov W ATP Bastad W Bol Fut (w/MathMul)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kuerten View Post
Freakyman is a mythical figure who went bat shit insane during the 2012 ACC and got himself permbanned and the whole ACC with him.

He then forced an unban by sleeping with the entire moderation crew and these days you can see him post in a mellowed down version, while being under the influence of strong medication.
Freak3yman84 is online now View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 09:21 AM   #29
country flag hugocnamaral
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Age: 36
Posts: 980
hugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond reputehugocnamaral has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by keqtqiadv View Post
First of all, thanks for all the suggestions We're now proceeding to the next step of the changes period. This thread will be used to discuss the topics which were brought up in the suggestions thread.

The suggestions are ordered by numbers. You can vote/discuss each of the topics and also reply to posts of other players.

It's not necessary to vote for all the topics, but the players' participation is important for a decision/change to be made.

COMMITMENTS

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?

Yes/No? (Current rule: yes) YES

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?

Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes) YES

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:

GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule) YES
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying? YES
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami? NO

4) Late entries & SE's:

No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE? NO

5) Doubles commitments:

It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule) NO
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list? YES

6) Singles commitments by another person?

Yes/No (Current rule: yes) NO


DRAWS


7) Late entries & seedings

No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded? YES

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?

Yes/No (Current rule: no) NO


SENDING PICKS


9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?

Yes/No (Current rule: no)
NO
10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?

Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes) YES

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?

Yes/No (Current rule: no) NO


OOP


12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)
5

13) Standardizing the OOP:

No - Manager's choice (Current rule) NO
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?NO
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?

NO

TB System


14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.

Yes/No (Curret rule: no) NO

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?

Yes/No (Current rule: no) NO

16) PTS:

Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?
YES

RANKING POINTS


17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.

Yes/No (Current rule: no) YES

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.

Yes/No (Current rule: no) YES


OTHERS


19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)?
YES

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

Ranking Points

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline?
NO
__________________
TT Singles
W:(2013)Caltanissetta CH,PragueCH (2012)Madrid Fut
F:(2013)San Juan CH, Yokohama CH, Andria CH (2012)Blumenau CH

Doubles
W:(2014)Delray Beach(250),Prostejov CH (2012)Rio Quente CH,Gexto F,Madrid F, Istambul F,Yokohama CH
F:(2013)Leon CH (2012)Blumenau CH,Monza CH,Marburg CH



PAW:
W: Washington 2013, Bangkok 2013
RU:Bangkok 2012
hugocnamaral is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 06:36 PM   #30
country flag kingroger
Registered User
 
kingroger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,227
kingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond reputekingroger has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: TT Changes 2013

1) Should players be allowed to play in two places at the same time (the final of a week X event AND the qualifying of a week x+1 event)?
Yes/No? (Current rule: yes)

2) Should players who lose in a Grand Slam qualifying be allowed to play a challenger in the following week?
Yes/No/No if qualifying points are introduced? (Current rule: Yes)

3) GS/IW/Miami week 2 events:
GS R16 - out of qualifying; GS QF - out of MD? (current rule)
Players who're still alive in the GS (or IW/Miami) by Saturday (GS R16) should be out of the 2nd week challengers, MD or qualifying?
Players should be able to commit to the 2nd week challengers only after they're out of the GSs/IW/Miami?

4) Late entries & SE's:
No restrictions? (current rule)
Players who commit as late entries 48 hours or less before the final deadline shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?
Players who commit as late entries shouldn't be eligible to receive a SE?

5) Doubles commitments:
It should be enough if only a player commits the doubles team? (current rule)
Both players in a partnership should commit/confirm before being accepted in the doubles list?

6) Singles commitments by another person?
Yes/No (Current rule: yes)


DRAWS

7) Late entries & seedings
No restrictions? (current rule)
Late entries shouldn't be seeded?

8) Should there be a restriction to avoid singles R1 matches between doubles partners?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


SENDING PICKS

9) Should picks which were sent to the person who posted the OOP be accepted?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

10) Should picks sent by e-mail be accepted?
Yes/No/Facebook? (Current rule: yes)

11) Should there be a punishment for players who don't send picks?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OOP

12) Standard minimum of TT matches in first rounds (4, 5, 6, 7, no restrictions?)

13) Standardizing the OOP:
No - Manager's choice (Current rule)
Yes - The order should be decided by the number of differences of each match: more diffs -> higher in the SR order?
Yes - The order should be decided by the order of the matches in the official OOP: left to right or top to bottom?


TB System

14) TB method: The number of sets given to the winner when the player picks the loser (2-1, 3-2 & 3-1 losing picks) should be a tie-breaker before the SR shootout.
Yes/No (Curret rule: no)

15) SR Shootout: Picking the correct winner or SR of a lower SR should have priority over giving a set to the winner when both players pick the loser in a higher SR?
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

16) PTS:
Correct order of sets should always beat correct scorelines?
GD should be used as the PTS system?


RANKING POINTS

17) Qualifying points: There should be points for qualifying wins.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)

18) There should be a Team Race for the World Tour Finals.
Yes/No (Current rule: no)


OTHERS

19) Retirements should count for SR and shootout purposes (64 40 ret -> 64 60 win; 46 23 ret -> 46 63 60 win)? Yes

20) Challenger choices: ranking points/entry list quality or diversity of continents/timezones?

21) Possible exception: Accepting picks 1/2/3/4/5 minutes after the deadline? No
__________________
TTS:#122 (High: #121) W (2)2012: Alphen CH, Szezecin CH
TTD: #132 (High: #26)
W (5) 2012: Caloundra CH w/TankingTheSet, Memphis w/Hellcat, Arad CH w/Marto - 2011: Cherbourg CH w/Kirilenko-Fan, Miami w/Kirilenko-Fan
DTT Singles: High: #1 - W Australian Open 2011, Madrid 2011, Tokyo 2011
DTT Doubles: High: #3 - W Wimbledon 2011, US Open 2011
kingroger is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios