Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

New World Ranking System!

Discussion in 'Professional Players' started by hcpoirot, Jun 22, 2006.

  1. hcpoirot

    hcpoirot Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Indonesia
    If you like me monitored the world ranking each week :D, you probably found lots and lots of suprise in this week new ranking.

    How come Lin Dan who just runner up in Malaysia Open 2006 tumbling from rank 1 to 3? Or Peter Gade who only reach QF of the same tournament, jump from number 3 to 1 pass Lee Chong Wei who is the champion there?

    Or how come Xu Huai Wen who even didn't enter MO2006 become the new rank 1 meanwhile the champion MO 2006 Zhang Ning tumble to no 2?

    Don't panic its just new world ranking system from IBF.

    The old ranking system is like this:

    Example: Nova/Butet from Mix D.

    They are the champion of Indonesia Open 2005 , 25-9-2005 and had 5400 points.
    This year 4-6-2006 In Indonesia Open they are the finalist with 4590 points.

    In Old ranking, Nova/Butet will had 9990 points from this 2 events although the new Indonesia Open 2006 points already in their ranking. The 2005 IO points will be erase after one year from the tournamnet which is 25-9-2006. About 3 months from now.

    With this dobel points from the same tournaments but differennce year, Nova/ Butet who didn't enter lots of tournamnets can mantain their number 1 ranking.

    But thenew ranking, it will erased the 2005 tournamnet points after the same tournamnet been played in 2006 , regardless if that 2005 tournament are over one year or not.

    Thats why NOva/Butet tumbling to number 4 after get cut from Indonesia Open 2005 points.

    So the point of this new ranking is IBF encouraged all the players to enter as many tournamnets as possible in one year. And not only enter 8-9 events a year and used the tournaments dates to gain extra points.
     
  2. hcpoirot

    hcpoirot Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Indonesia
    With the new ranking, China, Indonesia and Malaysian players suffered the most cause most of the players only enter 7-9 events a year.

    Lots of them stumble from their rankings after Indonesia Open 2005, Singapore Open 2005, Malaysia Open 2005. China Master 2005 points been erased although the events is not one year yet.

    Meanwhile most of the European players gain from this new ranking cause they enter 10-12 or more events a year.

    Like Peter Gade who reach number one rank in MS and also Xu Huai Wen rank 1 in WS despite she never won any title except European Championship this year. But she enter more than 10 events in one year, meanwhile Zhang Ning only 8 tournaments.
     
  3. hcpoirot

    hcpoirot Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Indonesia
    Another example:

    So in order to complete 10 events this year, Nova/Butet had to play 5 more tournaments this year. If Nova/Butet still wanted to hold on in the top 3 positions.

    2006 only had 9 more tournaments including the 3* and 2* events.
     
  4. jgao_net

    jgao_net Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    canada
    i dont like this new system. world rankings should be based on the number or tournaments you win or how far you get in a tournament, not based on how many tournaments you enter.
    does this mean that some player no one ever heard has a possibility of becoming world number 1 if he goes to every single possible tournament?
     
  5. twobeer

    twobeer Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    4,000
    Likes Received:
    11
    Occupation:
    computer
    Location:
    Sweden
    hmm..

    1) I think its very strange to change the ranking mid-year...

    2) It seems like to many points are awarded for results in medium (or not the major) tournaments missing many top-ten-players.

    Once again it seems IBF is having a clouded intellect?!?!?

    /Twobeer
     
  6. joetheshow

    joetheshow Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Fulltime day dreamer
    Location:
    Victoria/Waterloo, Canada
    watheck?! Lin Dan have been #1 for about 3 year in a row now, what a wonderful recorded to be ruined. This will be a whole different ballgame when it comes to time to accumulate points for the olympics. This is a good way of forcing out the top players in the world - ie. the Taufik in hiding, to play more often. I suppose we badminton fans will be treated with more high calibur matches this way. Hope the top players in the world come to Canada or US Open haha
     
  7. Bbn

    Bbn Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    2
    Apparently designed to cause a lot of surprise results in coming World Champs.

    Really have to be good to fight to the finals and not just depending on good draws and seedings.

    Plus a dangerous 21 point system.

    Surprise results? Unpredictable? Good or bad?.
     
  8. twobeer

    twobeer Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    4,000
    Likes Received:
    11
    Occupation:
    computer
    Location:
    Sweden
    Well my only gripe is really that I think the world ranking should...at least try to.. reflect the skill ranking and that the number #1 player are the "best" player not the most ambitious top-ten player :(
     
  9. kasuya

    kasuya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Taufik being #24 in the world... hmmm... that's just not right. I am not a big fan of his, but people new to professional badminton must be confused by the so-called ranking system so bad.

    I know Peter Gade is good and he is my favorite, but honestly he should be top 2 or 3, not first.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that Tennis' ranking system seems to be able provide the fans a better understanding of which player is better by looking at their ranking despite their form during the match.
     
  10. kasuya

    kasuya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    To be honest, that's how some Canadian players actually make it to the top 100 in the world ranking these days. Have you ever seen them in 4, 5, or 6 stars tournaments??? like never, yet one of them used to be rank around 20-30 I believe.
     
  11. Wildstone

    Wildstone Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    I strongly agree with all the posts above.
    The new ranking system does not actually reflect the best players. The old ranking system at least gives very clear idea who is the best in the world.
     
  12. jgao_net

    jgao_net Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    canada
    hahaha, that might be the only positive coming out of this new system. :D
     
  13. storkbill

    storkbill Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    sg
    Let me put this poser to you: How would you encourage the top players to play in more tournaments if all they need to do is play in say 9-10 tournaments a year only?

    As a badminton fan... lets say in a country without a 5 star and above tournament. Wouldn't you like to see a 5 star tournament hosted in your country so that you can watch the top players live?

    And let's say your country manages to get sponsors for a 5-star event but the top players don't come, what will the sponsors think? They may well withdraw or reduce funding to say 1 or 2 star status.
     
  14. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    38,211
    Likes Received:
    280
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    wait a minute. is everyone jumping into conclusion too quickly?

    the new changes doesn't mean more tournaments leads to higher ranking. the new system only means that if the same tournament in two consecutive years are less than 12 months apart, the players don't get to keep the points for 12 months.

    but notice, it works vice versa, no? if the same tournament in two consecutive years are more than 12 months apart, they get to keep the points for more than 12 months.

    it just happens that there are more tournament date shuffling in 2006 as the TC/UC and WC are going on in the same year, that's why some points get discounted.

    imho, this does make ranking more unpredictable, but it does not mean more tournaments -> higher rankings. at least not any worse than the old ranking computation.
     
  15. KooGuy

    KooGuy Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    Interesting...confusing with NSS and now ranking issue, what's next? Let's hope we don't see Kooguy on #1 :D
     
  16. cxytdn

    cxytdn Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    687
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    New system? I think it's meaningless if a certain tournament is fixed (eg. AE) every year. This system just makes, maybe, a certeain tournament more fixed than before.
     
  17. hcyong

    hcyong Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    101
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    KL & Sg
    kwun is right. Most of you are jumping to conclusions. The new system is just a slight tweak to the old one.

    That said, I still prefer the old one. I think that what counts is your performance in the last 52 weeks, and should have nothing to do with locale.
     
  18. hcyong

    hcyong Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    101
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    KL & Sg
    Another thing that rankles is why IBF did not announce this to the public earlier. Even now, after the system is already in place, there is no announcement and documentation. It is just dumped on us.

    I hope at least that the national badminton associations were informed earlier.
     
  19. hcyong

    hcyong Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    101
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    KL & Sg
    To put it in a nutsell,

    Old system: Performance* in the last 52 weeks, period.

    New system: Performance* in the last set of tournaments. (Can someone else put this more eloquently? Some lawyer? Eastdevil? :))

    * Only best 10 tournaments (can include maximum of one team tournament only)
     
    #19 hcyong, Jun 22, 2006
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2006
  20. hcyong

    hcyong Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    101
    Occupation:
    Software Engineer
    Location:
    KL & Sg
    What has the new system got to do with the CTO?

    If Lee CW gets into the semifinals (ie. if he wins today), he will be the No 1 next week.

    Peter Gade is not around so he can't do anything about it. And LCW only has 9 tournaments to his ranking (and equally important, last year's CTO is not there), so any points gathered here will just be simply added.

    Lin Dan has 8 tournaments to his ranking only. But even if he wins the Open, he still would not have enough to overtake LCW (if Lee gets into semis that is). If Lin wins the CTO title, and LCW loses today, then Lin becomes the No 1 next week.
     

Share This Page