[Scotso]

1. F. Lapentti 175
2. H. London 153
3. P. Seles 122
4. A. Urumov 117
5. K. Krasnoroutsky 94
6. M. Kasaus 70
7. K. Kiefer 69
8. M. Michael-Ferrero 67
9. F. Spears 62
10. G. Golduck 61
11. D. Nest 57
12. C. Spencer 55
13. A. Vasiljevic 53
14. T. Sanchez 46
15. S. Keller 44
16. J. Esaiasson 42
17. A. Bargary 40 (debut! )
18. H. Daas 39
19. A. Cacciatore 37
19. T. Frings 37
21. V. Safin 34
22. C. Daniilidou 32
23. L. Tavares 27
24. A. Averanovs 25
25. D. Hingis 20
25. B. Conde-Martinez 20
27. N. Gambill 18
28. S. Saretta 9
29. A. Smith 2
30. J. Dickhardt 1

 

[Scotso]

I've just came from the ATP website and the ranking system that Matthew used isn't correct I thought at first that it was just like a factor of, like maybe he divided in half, but that's not the case. The bigger tournaments in his system give less points than some of the smaller ones, so the rankings are off.

Heath p) should actually be number 1 in the rankings due to the fact that he won the US Open, however since Matthew's system had the points for winning a TMS as the same as for a GS, he's not.

But, what I'm going to do right now, is to multiple all the above figures by a factor of two. 330 for Lapentti, etc. I'm not going to change the rankings because that would just take far too much time. So, what is going to happen is that these ranking points will stay as they are, as for most people they're not that far off. However, next year after the Australian Open I'm going to subtract this year's points. (So for next year, the rankings will only reflect from Hong Kong onward.) That way the ranking systems will be more normal. I'm still not sure why this point system was used but that's okay.

If you don't understand what I just babbled tell me and I'll explain.

I also think that for the rest of this year I'm going to use singles rankings to determine seedings for doubles... because the doubles rankings are totally off. Next year hopefully I'll be able to start fresh with them.

 

[Kojangs]

Go Bargary...!