Just now checked . Though Li xuerui was world no.1 last year, she won only 4 titles. She lost many finals to her compatriots. We won't say World no.1 as joke something like that. This is just 4th tournament for saina. So, let us wait till the end of the year and see whether she is able to win more than 4 titles or so. Then we can judge.
What an interesting thread here... not from the ranking per-se, that would be released this thursday for all to see. Obviously I am pointing to the indirect debate about who is the current BEST WS player, so is this debate going to be over after tomorrow? SN vs LXR match in malaysian open semi final is gonna decide the world champion? that too in the semis This debate would continue till there is a hope for the rest of the world... I say rest of the world vs CHN in badminton cause see if SN has to win she has to win against 4 chinese opponents consecutively... An army against one soldier thats how the feeling would be.... LXR is coming back from an injury so she isnt in the greatest position she would like it to be on the other hand. If one doesnt goes by the ranking which is a fair indication for every week. Let the Olympics come, that could be a parameter.... IMHO nobody is gonna say they dont value Olympics LXR has already won one title so she was definitely the BEST player during London Olympics. RIO would be another day another script to write for SN if she has it in her.
What are you smoking? Saina 1-1 record against top chinese are pathetic. The ones whom she recently beat are mostly young upstart players. If Saina beat LXR tomorrow, its due to her own effort regardless LXR is fit or not. No one is saying LXR is testing water. It seems you're the one whining here.
No one loses any points when they lose a match. Nor are any points deducted if they skip a tournament. The 'loss' of points happens because of the way the ranking points are calculated. To illustrate, let's look at Li Xuerui's situation after this year's Singapore Open. She won those 7,800 points by finishing Runner-up on 13 April 2014. The following Thursday, her ranking was updated to include those 7,800 points. This year, when the same week comes around, she will 'lose' the benefit of those 7,800 points because a player's current ranking is based on points earned only in the last 52 weeks. When this year's Singapore Open happens, her 7,800 points will no longer matter because she got those 53 weeks ago.
yeah right. only 4 titles last year. but 3 of them, Saina also involved in the tournament, means Saina lose to other player in 2 events, and also lose to Li Xuerui in Indonesia open. Saina now has 2 titles, both in home country, india gpg and ss 2015, plus australia and china ssp 2014, but Li Xuerui is not there. so the conclusion is saina never won a title when Li XR is involved in the tournament, in the last 12 months.
well, to be precise, for the entire 2014, Saina never finished ahead of Li XR when both players participated in the same tournament. Li XR vs Saina N Malaysia : Winner vs R2 AE : RU vs QF India : RU vs QF Spore : RU vs R1 Ina : Winner vs QF WC : RU vs QF AG : RU vs SF Denmark : Winner vs QF French : RU vs QF conclusion : - LXR always finish ahead of Saina, include in SN home country, India - LXR always qualify into final - Saina never qualify into final, include finish in R1 in Singapore
But last year's S'pore Open points advantage for LXR will be lost. It's so close there at world no.1. A lot of permutations. Good for discussion. And we always say, Player A might lose to player B, player B might lose to C, but that doesn't automatically mean player C will lose to A..
nevermind. LXR still has 2 events to be #1 again. off topic, did u know how many points for BAC winner ?
Off hand, no. Isn't it something like GPG? For no.1, I prefer to see what happens on Thursday and then the Thursday after that. It's good that the ladies are producing this interesting exchange at the top of the tree.
previously I'm sure it is GPG level, means 7k points for the winner. but now I'm not so sure as someone in this forum says it is equivalent with SS level.
SS would be pretty difficult to justify. SS points gain and above should be reserved for world events, not continental events. Otherwise, SS events will lose inherent value.
Yes, it's a GPG event. The Badminton Asia Championship is a Continental Championship. The Asian and European Continental Championships have Grand Prix Gold status. The winner earns 7000 points. Note: In case of a better performance in team events, the confederation can ask for those points to be used instead of the individual points earned. It's all unnecessarily confusing!
First of all I think this thread shouldn't have existed. This is because it is very controversial to talk about who will be world ranking no 1. So what if player A becomes world no 1. Is ranking that important? No it is not. It is performance on the court that is more important. How many times have we seen examples of lower ranked players toppling those players higher ranked than them? Many times. If ranking no 1 is so important then other players not being world ranking no 1 shouldn't be playing anymore. I can forsee that this thread will be close down due to controversial issues and discussions. Well what I can say is if a player can only win when there are no great players playing in tournament then that person doesn't deserve to be world ranking no 1. Remember action speaks louder than words. So there is no point talking about who is world no 1 here. Let the performance at the court decide it. Enough said.
In that case LCW never deserved the #1 ranking because every time he faced LD, we know what happened.
Li XueRui will indeed regain WR#1 after Malaysia Open. However, no matter what happens at Singapore Open, Saina Nehwel will be on top again after Singapore Open for at least two weeks, until the Asia Championships. Meanwhile, Carolina Marin will drop 2,100 points in three weeks. By the way, I hope that most participants of this forum have a good enough understanding of what WR#1 is to bicker about it. Personally, I don't take WR#1 automatically as the best player/pair, but I recognize any and all title holders as part of the badminton elites for their proven excellence. In contrary, the same cannot be said for winning an SS title.
Ranking is the cumulative result of a player's performance on court over a number of matches, not just one or two. The higher his/her World Ranking, the more consistent it says of the player. LCW has been WR1 maybe for a record time than other MS as a result of winning many tournaments. Granted some good players participate in very few tournaments for whatever reasons. Injury, lack of funds or other priorities by the National Association. However I believe these are few in number. If a particular player is really good, a NA worth its salt should field him as often as possible. Upsets do happen, especially at lower level tournaments, if we mean a lower-ranked player won against a higher-ranked opponent. But at higher levels such as the SS, SSP, usually the difference in ranking between them may not be too far apart. And if an amazing talent should occur, his ranking will only improve in the course of time. Seeding in a tournament is based on ranking. The higher ranked a player is, the easier his passage in the early stages as he could avoid the seeded players in general. But as he advances to the next round, his opponent would usually be tougher, especially when he is also seeded. The two highest-ranked players are separated in the draw so that they will not have to meet too early in the tournament. In this sense, world ranking is important to differentiate between the more consistent players from the less consistent, thereby giving the higher ranked players an advantage. Depending on the number of participants, a large number will mean the lowest-ranked players will have to start as Qualifiers and therefore their passage to the main draw and subsequently will take a longer and probably harder route. Even good players who returned from injury and had their ranking lowered, will have to play in the Qualification round.
