TT changes - the hot topics

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

yes

Would be a fun addition to the game and give a little help to many kinds of players (except to the top 30 or 50 players, who don't need help ).

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system

CB before PTS

The overall tournament CB should come before the PTS, because that way I think the better player will be rewarded and not the more lucky one (PTS).

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)

yes

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

yes, Top 30

Should the ban also include the Grand Slam 2nd weeks, Davis Cup weeks and the weeks after the Paris Masters Series tournament?

no

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards:
No, at GS there will be a big fight under the lower ranked players for WC, with WC's there will always be accidents, and it's crap for the one who is 1st qualified in qualies.
WC player is playing in his place.

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system
No, a result in the round before shouldn't give someone a winning match.

3. Protected Ranking (PR)
Yes, this is just a great idea.

4. Special Exempts (SE)
No, this makes everything so compared for managers.

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers
No, I think players have to choose where they want to play, and also challengers if they want. If this rule is coming I even don't wanna be in top 50.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. No to that particular system. I support the idea brought up in the discussion thread that the winner of a challenger should get a WC into their next ATP event. I do not think that there should be WC into Masters or Grand Slams because those are events worth a lot of points, and if your ranking has earned you a spot there, you should be allowed to play in it. If the masses feel WC must exist, it should be for IS or ISG only.

2. CB before PTS. Reward the better tipper overall.

3. Yes.

4. Yes, but I am curious how this would work. If someone is in the finals of a TT event on Saturday and Sunday, and qualifying draws are out on Friday... how does it work that they get into the main draw and someone else in the qualifying draw? The manager would have to redo the draw all over? :scratch: I am not sure I understand this being put into action.

5. Yes, but only top 30, and it should not include Grand Slam or Davis Cup or post Paris weeks.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

yes (more realistic)

2. CB before PTS

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)

yes

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

yes, Top 50

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards
Yes, definitely. Adds an extra dimension to the game. Makes it more realistic. Players who are shit at TT (but love tennis) get a chance to play one or two big events a year.

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system
No.

3. Protected Ranking (PR)
Yes.

4. Special Exempts (SE)
Yes. This will help newcomers, on a roll, rise up the rankings.

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers
Yes, top 50. But allow any top 50 player to apply for WCs.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

no

At least not in the way you have suggested - I would favour winners of Challengers getting wild cards but not journeymen and not based on nationality.

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system

CB before PTS

The overall tournament CB should come before the PTS, because that way I think the better player will be rewarded and not the more lucky one (PTS). - Same thoughts as Ville so I won't amend.

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)

yes

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

yes, Top 50

Should the ban also include the Grand Slam 2nd weeks, Davis Cup weeks and the weeks after the Paris Masters Series tournament?

no

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

I don't like the idea of WCs. I'd like to see how Ville's suggestion works though. They wouldn't be like the real WCs since they'd be decided on rank, so maybe it's a good try

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

This is the only part I'll be really upset if there's a change. The other suggestions, they really don't touch me, but I have nightmares everyday because of this one. The basic question: do we want to make this a game which really uses a fair knock out format like ATP? I think yes. In my opinion, a game like the Race to 47 suits those who want their previous scores to be used to decide the winner of the tournament. If you wanna win on the tournament performance, create a league game. I just can't accept that a match can start 90% one sided. A player would have to take risks whchi are not expected to happen, and that's wrong. It's not how things should be. In easy OOPs the player who has the CB advantage would have a very safe way to win the match without a TB system that decides the match in the round it's played. This is one of the basic parts of the game, you have to beat your opponent. You send picks to be better than him in this round, not to win the final match on CB. There must be a third set TB in which you can serve an unlucky DF or hit a lucky net cord, or a PK decision. A player can't start a match with 1 set advantage in the format we're using, it's not realistic and makes the game lose its excitement. A good performance in a round should NOT give you any advantage in the next rounds. The strategic tipping FD mentioned in this post is part of the game, it makes things real and exciting. I agree 100% with what he said here. We should play strategically to win a round, not to win the tournament. I played many matches with the CB advantage trying to pick the same players of my opponent, and it worked more than once. Is it fun? Matches should never be decided on a previous round. Since it's not possible to be done, at least it should be as close as possible to a 50-50.

Countback

Not keen on matches being decided on countback. I thought the aim of tennis tipping was to pit two tippers against each other in that match, and the winner of that match goes through to the next round. If this is the case, then the match should never be decided on anything other than how the two people performed in that match. Example... I lost my 4th round match at the US Open on countback, with Murilo having 1 or 2 more correct picks in the previous match. However, in our previous matches we had gone for different tactics on the final day, with him picking who he thought the winners would be, and me taking risks to try and defend a lead by blocking off any potential risks that my opponent could take (didn't work, as there were 7 differences on the last day, but that is beside the point). Should I have been penalised in the next round for taking a different strategy in the previous round, when the aim of the game is to pick more winners than your opponent in that round, rather than who picks the most winners in the tournament?

Click to expand...

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=6227304&postcount=269

I think all matches should be SRs and PTS (or another new TB system) must stay as a tie breaker. It's not like it decides all the matches anyway. Even with it, matches are usually decided on CB because the PTS is usually tied. I just think it's ridiculous to decide a match in the scores you had before in a game that's played in the format we use and with the objective to be as close to the reality, it's like cancelling the third set Tb and giving the win to the player who had a better performance in the previous round. The game will have lost almost all its meaning to me if things like these get to happen more often than it should. The finals would be the most affected matches by this rule change (only 3 matches), and they're supposed to be the most exciting ones. :zzz:

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

yes

Yes, I think it's a good idea It should be used like in ATP.

4. Special Exempts (SE)

yes

I don't think it's necessary, since it exists because the player is not able to play two tournaments at the same time. But I'd like to see it implemented, it should make the game more realistic and would reward the players who have done well in a tournament but don't have a rank to enter directly in the next one.

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

yes

I play them just for fun As for the points, yes, it doesn't help the challenger players if the top players are allowed to play them I think we should use the ATP rules here. The top 30/50 ranked players could play "exhibition" tournaments in the weeks they're not allowed to play challengers

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards
No

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system
No

3. Protected Ranking (PR)
Yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)
Yes

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers
No, players should play wherever they want. If they want to play challengers, let they do it!

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

Sure, at first I thought this was silly, but it actually sounds pretty good. The one thing Im not sure about is WCs for grand slams, I think that this may be a bad idea, but for all other tournaments they will add an interesting aspect.

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system

Personally I would like a CB of the whole tournament but if that cant be done, PTS is fine.

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

Sounds good.

4. Special Exempts (SE)

If its the same as the ATP, were it has to be the same level of tournament or a lower one, then yes.

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

No, anyone should be able to play challengers, its not like the top players are for sure gonna be better than everyone else by a large margin in challengers, its tipping differnet matches.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. In terms of WC, I am against them in all aspects, in that, being a top 40 player, I would never need to use them. I didn't get to use WC's to make my rise in the ranks, so why should others get a leg up in trying to overtake those in the top 50?

2. I am against the CB...in real tennis, it doesn't matter how poorly you played in the previous round, only that you won. Someone who scrapes through shouldn't start with a disadvantage against a player who won easily last round.

3. Yes, it is both logical and realistic.

4. Yes, as it awards good tipping, as opposed to a WC. Although I would say to only use them on the same scale as the ATP, not giving someone a SE to a grand slam who made the semis of a small tournament the week before.

5. Personally, I do not think that there should be any restrictions on challengers. If a top player wishes to play a challenger, then that will open up a spot in an ATP even for a lower ranked player. In terms of non-ATP weeks, why should we ban our top players from gaining points. The game has enough parody already without this.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

yes

I like something new and intresting, maybe a trial period needed though


2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system

CB before PTS

Yeah i like this idea of rewarding good tippers, it will also make tippers want more of the players they picked win, instead of just the players they need for the round.

3. Protected Ranking (PR)

Definately Yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)

Again, great idea

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

Top 30

Should the ban also include the Grand Slam 2nd weeks, Davis Cup weeks and the weeks after the Paris Masters Series tournament?

Yes I think Top 30 should not be allowed to play challengers at all

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards
NO, NO and once more NO
this system has nothing to do with reality. Imagine what would happen if at all tournaments WC are granted to the highest ranked players asking for WC.

2. Countback (CB) before PTS as part of the TB system
no CB. As I have said already - previous round has nothing to deal with next one

3. Protected Ranking (PR)
yes

4. Special Exempts (SE)
let it be

5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers
ban for top 50, but it shouldn't include GS, DC or post Paris weeks.

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. NO
2. NO
3. YES
4. NO
5. A ban for Top 30 or 50 players from all the challengers

YES

Should the ban also include the Grand Slam 2nd weeks, Davis Cup weeks and the weeks after the Paris Masters Series tournament?

NO

Re: TT changes - the hot topics (state your opinions in 1 post)

1. Wild Cards

I would prefer not to have them. They won't be like real ATP wild cards anyway (if they were they would be annoyingly arbitrary). Ville's system could work though. It would give lower ranked players the chance to play one or two big events what would make the game more fun for them.

But I fear players who are going down the ranking will have better chances to get WCs than those who are going up. Players who have a good ranking throughout most of the year and then go down can save their WCs for the end of the year and will be able to enter the big events some weeks longer than they normally would be able to do. New players who are climbing up the ranking will have to climb even higher before they get direct entries. (Maybe this rule could help: One WC must be used within the first half of the year, another in the second half.)

2. CB/PTS

I like CB more than PTS as PTS often is pure luck. But I understand as well that previous rounds performances should not affect later rounds too much. Therefore I'm against using overall-tournament CBs. The CB rule should stay the way it is now. I'm undecided wether it should come before or after PTS.

3. Protected Ranking

Okay. I have no passion in this point. PRs should be limited to those players who cannot play TT over months for a serious reason. Players who just lose interest in TT and than want to give it a new try should not get PRs. That means people who want to get an PR should announce this in advance.

4. Special Exempts

Of all chances that are being disussed this is the one I like most. Players with a low ranking who are doing well in a tournament should be rewarded. This will help good newbies. I would even like SEs for tournaments of higher level. (But only if we won't have WCs. Otherwise there would be to many special entries in addition.)

5. Challengers ban for top players

Yes. Leave the challengers to those who need the points! I like the challenger tour and I have played some TT challengers from time to time. But top players will survive if they can't play challengers in the second week of Grand Slams or during Davis Cup. If top players urgently want to play challengers I would even prefer to open those challengers which are parallel to IS events. Every top player who plays a challenger in that week automatically leaves a spot in the ATP event to a lower ranked player. So it does not hurt too much.