Men's Singles Rankings changed

[virusvoodoo]

Hey guys, check out the rankings at the Internation Badminton Federation website (http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/desktopmodules/ranking.asp?categorycode=MS&scr=1024x768). It has changed a bit, well at least for the men's singles category.

I see that Peter GADE moved up from #6 to #3 switching places with WONG Choong Hann. LEE Hyun II and Sony Dwi KUNCORO moved up a few spots while BAO Chunlai and XIA Xuanze moved down severals. The top two Chinese players, LIN Dan and CHEN Hong, still remain as #1 and 2.

I wonder if this is due to the results from the Olympics.

[WoAiZhongGuo]

Yeah, i noticed that too... it's all a bit sudden though isn't it?! i'm not sure... does the Olympics even count in the rankings overall?!

[*izzyC*]

Did you guys check the ranking date? It was 5 August 2004... The list was released before the Olympics...

[seven]

This has already been discussed in another thread... (the change is due to 2003 WC not counting anymore)

[badminfreak]

only top fives
lindan
chen hong
gade
lee hyun
bao chun lai

gong ruina
zhang ning
zhou mi
mia
wang chen

choong and lee wan wah
ha and kim dong moon
paaske and rasmussen
fu haifeng and caiyun
hadiyanto and alven

yang wei and zhang jiewen
gao lin and huang sui
Ra and lee
wei and zhao
hwang and lee

kim and ra
zhang and gao
kim and lee
robertson and emms
widianto and marrisa

pfew that took long but worth it

[jaclyn]

only top fives
lindan
chen hong
gade
lee hyun
bao chun lai

gong ruina
zhang ning
zhou mi
mia
wang chen

choong and lee wan wah
ha and kim dong moon
paaske and rasmussen
fu haifeng and caiyun
hadiyanto and alven

yang wei and zhang jiewen
gao lin and huang sui
Ra and lee
wei and zhao
hwang and lee

kim and ra
zhang and gao
kim and lee
robertson and emms
widianto and marrisa

pfew that took long but worth it

is this standing correct after olympic????

[seven]

The new ranking which will take into account the results of the olympics will only be published on thursday... be patient!!

[Ningtyas]

Taufik is now number four, while Soni Dwi Kuncoro number five. Good :)



The new ranking which will take into account the results of the olympics will only be published on thursday... be patient!!

[Brave_Turtle]

I hope Taufik and Sony will rise to the top and surpass the chinese.

Is Lin Dan stopping his dominance?

[Fook90]

Taufik and Sony moves up to fourth and fifth place respectively. But Lin Dan continues to dominate. And Wong Choon Han moves down to eighth place.

I hope that Taufik and Sony will stop the Chinese dominance. They are the only ones who can defeat the Chinese. But it's ironic they didnt face any Chinese opposition in the Olympics

For the doubles, Olympic gold medalists Ha and Kim regain their form to become No. 1. And former No. 1 Choong and Lee are jus trailing behind. Surprisingly, World Champions JR and LP havd moved down to the seventh spot.

I hope the Indonesians will regain their strength-hold in men's doubles. They can rely on world No. 4 Alven and Luluk, No. 10 Sigit and Trikus and No. 11 Candra and Halim. After witnessing some disappointing news for the Indonesian team, especially Sigit and Trikus first round exit and Alven and Luluk surprising loss to the silver medalists, I really hope to see a strong Candra and Halim combination or maybe Candra and Sigit !

[Ningtyas]

I hope the Indonesians will regain their strength-hold in men's doubles. They can rely on world No. 4 Alven and Luluk, No. 10 Sigit and Trikus and No. 11 Candra and Halim. After witnessing some disappointing news for the Indonesian team, especially Sigit and Trikus first round exit and Alven and Luluk surprising loss to the silver medalists, I really hope to see a strong Candra and Halim combination or maybe Candra and Sigit !
I hope so! Thank God that Christian Hadinata will coach MD again.
imho, he's the best MD's coach ever. Let's wait and see

[dlp]

Counting the olympics and wc in the rankings is slightly strange, since only those already at the top of the rankings qualify for these events and they are worth so many points it effectively boosts the top 16 rankings away from the rest of the field.

This was particularly tough in this year when wc points counted towards the olympics, for instance Archer/Kellogg didn't make the WC 2003 due to injury but the other two english pairs did, although archer/kellogg then had far better results than the second english pair they didn't quite overtake them for olympic qual because of there massive wc points

[Badmincraze]

Counting the olympics and wc in the rankings is slightly strange, since only those already at the top of the rankings qualify for these events and they are worth so many points it effectively boosts the top 16 rankings away from the rest of the field.

This was particularly tough in this year when wc points counted towards the olympics, for instance Archer/Kellogg didn't make the WC 2003 due to injury but the other two english pairs did, although archer/kellogg then had far better results than the second english pair they didn't quite overtake them for olympic qual because of there massive wc points
Olympics counted towards the ranking cos it's a 7* event.. hence the big change.... :p

[Neil Nicholls]

Olympics counted towards the ranking cos it's a 7* event.. hence the big change.... :p
yes, but DLP is saying that the WC and Olympics are not Open events. They are effectively restricted to certain players based on their positions in the Ranking List.
And giving them such high * ratings only makes it worse. And the Olympics, with a reduced field, makes it easier for those that do enter to get more points.

[seven]

I find it normal for the olympics to count, it's the most important event of the year.

The players who fighted all year to earn their qualification deserve to gain points!

And anyway, no tournament is completely "Open", you need to have a good enough ranking to enter most of the biggest Grand Prix, which comes to the same thing...

[Neil Nicholls]

And anyway, no tournament is completely "Open", you need to have a good enough ranking to enter most of the biggest Grand Prix, which comes to the same thing...

In theory, your ranking only comes in to it if the event attracts more entrants than they normally cater for. In that sense, it is Open for anyone to enter, but their application may or may not be accepted. The Olympics is not Open in the sense that anyone can send in an entry form.

I can send an entry form in to the All England the same as I can for my local Open (the Staffordshire Open), but not the Olympics.

[New_Guy04]

Taufik and Sony moves up to fourth and fifth place respectively. But Lin Dan continues to dominate. And Wong Choon Han moves down to eighth place.

I hope that Taufik and Sony will stop the Chinese dominance. They are the only ones who can defeat the Chinese. But it's ironic they didnt face any Chinese opposition in the Olympics

For the doubles, Olympic gold medalists Ha and Kim regain their form to become No. 1. And former No. 1 Choong and Lee are jus trailing behind. Surprisingly, World Champions JR and LP havd moved down to the seventh spot.

I hope the Indonesians will regain their strength-hold in men's doubles. They can rely on world No. 4 Alven and Luluk, No. 10 Sigit and Trikus and No. 11 Candra and Halim. After witnessing some disappointing news for the Indonesian team, especially Sigit and Trikus first round exit and Alven and Luluk surprising loss to the silver medalists, I really hope to see a strong Candra and Halim combination or maybe Candra and Sigit !
i think candra won't come back to his top form ,even if he partnered sigit... everyone says partnering with halim was the cause of his slump, but i think it's probably bcuz age is catching up to him. i noticed koreans and danish players last longer than most players from other countries, which explains why kim/ha, lee/yoo and eriksen/lungaard are still going strong at old age... probably since they are taller and more built than other asian players (Except YOO YONG SONG, but w/e:D).

[seven]

In theory, your ranking only comes in to it if the event attracts more entrants than they normally cater for. In that sense, it is Open for anyone to enter, but their application may or may not be accepted. The Olympics is not Open in the sense that anyone can send in an entry form.

I can send an entry form in to the All England the same as I can for my local Open (the Staffordshire Open), but not the Olympics.
Anyone can participate in the Olympics provided he qualifies... the qualifications are known well in advance, they are the same for everyone and are perfectly objective so I don't see what's unfair there.
(it is totally different from an invitationnal tournament)

It would be completely unfair if Taufik didn't get his victory counted for example, and it would be ridiculous for him to still be ranked only 11 after being the olympic champion!!!

The world ranking is obviously much more accurate by including major events such as continental championships, world championships and olympic games!

[Neil Nicholls]

Anyone can participate in the Olympics provided he qualifies... the qualifications are known well in advance, they are the same for everyone and are perfectly objective

oh. Did Xua Xuanze qualify, or did he need to be selected by his national team?

They are not the same for everyone.
Some people have to be in the top 2/3 in China.
Some people only have to be the best in South Africa.

To enter an Open you just have to pay the money.

[seven]

If South Africa had 5 players in the top 16, they would only send three, it's the same as for China.
The rule is the same for everyone, players know what they need to do in order to qualify.

For your information : In an Open tournament, there is no limit per country but your own federation needs to accept you to participate, you can't just pay the money and participate!

One other thing : the ranking is calculated on the ten best performances so players who don't qualify for the olympics can get their points in any other tournament. Losing in the first round in the olympics is worth 150 points, winning an A grade (only) tournament is worth 180 points...

[dlp]

Yes in the AE, and most big grand prix there is a qualifying event which has as many players sometimes as the actual main draw, anyone in the top 100 can get in.

Consider a pair like laybourn/steffenson , they are at 22 in the md rankings after the oympics, back at xmas they were in the top 10 but a few bad results saw them slip and becuase denmark had 2 top 16 pairs above them they needed to be in the top 16 to qualify for athens. Now all the pairs that did qualify, some of them from a pre athens WR below lay/steff have had their ranking boosted by 150 points for losing first round, through to 600 for winning. when you consider that averaging 200 pts puts you in the top 16 150 points for just turning up at the olympics is pretty handy boost. When the world champs qualifying comes round the fact that they weren't in the olympics means lay/steff have to play catch up in the rankings. Same with Xia as Neil suggests.

An example the south african mens doubles pair qualified under the continental rules with a WR of 64 before the olympics and a best score of 126 pts all year, they receive 150 points and jump 10 places for losing 1st round.

[Brave_Turtle]

Then what should we do?

Not count Olympic in world ranking?

That's just non-sense, athletes that qualified in the olympic are the one who worked hard trough all the previous 4 years.

[Neil Nicholls]

Yes in the AE, and most big grand prix there is a qualifying event which has as many players sometimes as the actual main draw, anyone in the top 100 can get in.

well in that case, I could have entered the All England.
I have been in the English top 100.
More in a paying and turning up sense, than on badminton merit, but the rankings don't care about that.

[Neil Nicholls]

Then what should we do?

Not count Olympic in world ranking?

That's just non-sense, athletes that qualified in the olympic are the one who worked hard trough all the previous 4 years.

Maybe include WC and Olympics in the rankings, but do not let points from WC count towards entry criteria for the Olympics, and vice versa.

[kwun]

well in that case, I could have entered the All England.
I have been in the English top 100.
More in a paying and turning up sense, than on badminton merit, but the rankings don't care about that.
i know a couple who entered the US Open a few years ago. they were at the level and janet and i (ie. level C in the US). they played against these Korean pair who was just laughing and having fun with them.

but they said that by entering, they get to dine with the players and get special passes to go to all these inaccessible places. all for the price of entering, which is not much more than the price for a spectator ticket! :cool:

[Dill]

The guy that runs our club has always tried to get as many people as possible to enter the Scottish Open from various "worse than C level clubs" and becasue of the sheer quantity of numbers someone is bound to make it through the qualifying into the rounds proper because they would all be playing one another. Once they got into the rounds then the games would be like the one you have just described

Sounds just like my idea of fun :D



i know a couple who entered the US Open a few years ago. they were at the level and janet and i (ie. level C in the US). they played against these Korean pair who was just laughing and having fun with them.

but they said that by entering, they get to dine with the players and get special passes to go to all these inaccessible places. all for the price of entering, which is not much more than the price for a spectator ticket! :cool:

[dlp]

Dill, I was meaning more that anyone from 100 WR would get in rather than 100 uk, but I know players who have got in who were around 50 in doubles ranking in uk, basically they played the welsh open and got a few world ranking points. Of course getting in the AE varies depending on the year (olympic year harder etc)

I think the idea of not letting WC points count to olympics makes sense, but also there shouldn't be first round loser points which are far in excess of what some of the continental qualifiers have ever obtained. It is particularly hard on a player like Xia, he can be ranked 5 in the world and be excluded by slelcetion from the chance of winning the most points available all year. This will obviousley tell when it comes to wc 2005 selection.

[Dill]

Dill, I was meaning more that anyone from 100 WR would get in rather than 100 uk, but I know players who have got in who were around 50 in doubles ranking in uk, basically they played the welsh open and got a few world ranking points. Of course getting in the AE varies depending on the year (olympic year harder etc)

I think the idea of not letting WC points count to olympics makes sense, but also there shouldn't be first round loser points which are far in excess of what some of the continental qualifiers have ever obtained. It is particularly hard on a player like Xia, he can be ranked 5 in the world and be excluded by slelcetion from the chance of winning the most points available all year. This will obviousley tell when it comes to wc 2005 selection.

:confused: :confused:

I was replying to Kwun's post as the couple had a simmilar view to the guy that runs my club, to be honest I hadn't even read yours :eek:

Also the Scottish Open would be a slightly lower level than the AE :rolleyes: