The Standing of associasions after Hong Kong Open

thanks alot for the review :-)

wow, so china have won almost half the events this year.
and it's actually even more, if you consider only the bigger events, like 4 star and above, since there weren't many chinese in the smaller ones.
that's what i call domination .... looks like only md is still safe for now ...

Great Job!!! Thanks a lot, cxytdn

Just a few suggestions, Could you have two other tables for single's and association's money leaders, for each event.

The money leader could be more important and more meaningful than the IBF ranking. It can also aggregate for each association. So at least people will know where the money goes.

wow, so china have won almost half the events this year.
and it's actually even more, if you consider only the bigger events, like 4 star and above, since there weren't many chinese in the smaller ones.
that's what i call domination .... looks like only md is still safe for now ...

Exactly. A one star can be added to a six star, that doesn't make any sense.

But if you add six star's prize with one star's prize money, then it makes a lot of sense.

The Standing of associasions after Hong Kong Open

aha, this weighting by prize money makes more sense. how have you accounted for MD prize money when TG and CW have played, is it split 50-50 between INA and USA?

No offense for the players, but if we also use the chart as the "performance" reference, I suggest to take 1* (US) and 2* (NZL) results out, as the quality of the participants are no where near the others. :rolleyes:

yeah, i think the prize money chart is what allows for that. the 1* and 2* tournaments offer lower prize money, so that weights the win lower compared to winning the korea open, say ...

Wow, it's so great. Kowtow to you. Cxytdn.

Could you also release the personal money leader rankings. Thanks a million