Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2018 Tournaments' started by cxytdn, Jul 21, 2017.
Anyone else notice they've downgraded a lot of Challenges to Future Series or International Series?
Well, they've released how the new structure will affect points:
http://system.bwf.website/documents...ations-2018/184.108.40.206 World Ranking System .pdf
And the new tournament commitment obligations for players:
http://system.bwf.website/documents...2018/5.3.6 Player Commitment Regulations .pdf
New prize levels:
http://system.bwf.website/documents...ns-2018/5.3.1 Tournament Sanction Policy .pdf
I think to make it clearer, the actual Month and Day should be shown instead of just Week.
However, the calendar looks less confusing without the distracting colours.
For more exact and less confusing, there is the official one here : http://bwfcorporate.com/events/calendar/2018/
The ranking points are too closed by. They should have been further apart like tennis 2000,1000 and 500 points.
This will allow the player that won the most titltes being No1 in the world. Sometimes the player who won most titles dont end up Number1 yet.
In all honesty, whatever the circumstances, SK should be number 1 by now. 4titles and 1RU and not number 1 that is fake.
Wow... How dare you said Axelsen No.1 is fake thing?
Ranking is all 52-weeks achievement, not only short time double back-to-back wins. Axelsen deserved to be No.1 at least until the next Thursday release. He have World Champion title which is give the greatest points so far, 12000 when SK is only quarter finalist at WC.
Axelsen also have Dubai SSF winner's point. Plus 2 SS champions points. So, it's still 4 titles overall with WC' advantage 1000 points greater than SSP champion.
At the end, Axelsen's lowest point from R/16 SSP, better than SK's lowest point from R/16 German GPG.
Its not fake that Axelsen is WR1 but its Fake SK is not number 1 yet.
There is something wrong with the rankings, it has been for a while. If you put it in tennis terms, then SK will and should be No 1
Axelsen got booted out few times in R1 this year too.
i think the system is fine.
ks's points include 2 gp gold's, whereas va's are all from ss/p's. if ks won those 2 gp gold's, against lesser competition, he would be #1. if not beating the lesser competition is what currently keeps ks from being #1, the system works.
you'll have to explain in more detail what you think should change.
its Like how do you explain SonWanHo being number 1 without winning any title for the past year?
This will never happen in tennis.. in a million years.imagine nadal not winning anything but being Number 1.
He did won Korea Masters and reached A LOT of finals before that (Denmark, Singapore, Korea Open).
And if you still say that this is not enough, look at how Nicky Haiden won the world champion in 2006 Moto GP by only winning at 2 circuits out of 17.
As you said, it may not happen in a million years, but it may happen it the million and 1 year.
It is about probability and I think the world ranking structure already good enough to keep the probability low.
It all depends on what you want the world rankings to represent. If you want it to show who is best right now, then no, they are not necessarily correct. If you want them to represent average level and stability over the last X months and use this for seeding, then they are fine. You can argue that X = 12 is too high, but I would assume that it is a pretty common value to use across different sports.
Also, playing level can go up and down. KS is very strong these weeks, but I would not be surprised at all to see him lose in QF in the next big tournament.
Regarding the ranking, as others have mentioned, KS has won 4 tournaments of which two have been SSP+ level. So has VA. That KS has fewer points comes from the fact that his other results come from smaller tournaments.
KS has only entered 4 of the 7 tournaments of SSP+ level. Results: 2 wins, 1 x QF, 1 x 17/32.
VA played all 7. Results: 2 Wins, 1 x SF, 2 x QF, 1 x 9/16, 1 x 17/32.
Naturally, these results yield more points for VA than similar results do for KS in regular SS and GPG.
If you increased the point differences between the different tournament levels, VA would be much farther ahead of KS than he currently is.
If you increased the point differences between the different placements within the same tournament, it would not change much, as VA and KS are about equal in those terms. It would probably benefit VA (although very little) as the differences would be bigger for large tournaments.
Furthermore, anyone knows when BWF will announce the location for next year SSF?
I really hope that they still go with Dubai.
The fact that Dubai is seen as a futuristic city and is a new place that has no GP or SS events held there,
make the brand that the SSF-Dubai is a place to go and play for the elite players, especially with the year-end gala included in the program.
on the flip side if nadal won 2 grand slams in a year and never entered/played other tournaments should he be #1?
if so, for how long?
do you think points should reset on january 1st?
it's one thing to not like the current system, but if you want to be taken seriously propose a solution. 'just like tennis' isn't enough without an entire explanation of its system: include all tiers of tennis competition and seeding/qualifying processes. sure, i could google it, but i won't because why should i waste my time? i'm satisfied with the current system. however, i'm open to change so it's up to you to convince me and others of the logical need for change.
. It may not be common in Men’s Tennis but happened quite often from 2003 in women Tennis
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Kidambi is the real No.1 in term of Superseries, that's why Kidambi deserved No.1 in Destination Dubai Ranking
Kidambi has already been No.1 in Destination Dubai Ranking before he won his French Open.
BUT don't you know that Son Wan Ho is still the best for the moment in his World Championships 2018 Qualification Ranking?
For me, ranking is only the tool for determining the qualification for entry as well as the seeding of players in all singles and doubles tournaments.
Tennis have an example above. I give you more sport that telling you that it's possible to be No.1 without any World Cup champion tittle: FIFA World Ranking: Belgium take No. 1 spot for first time
In Badminton, it will simply describe by example:
- 10 times runner-up (5 SS & 5 SSP) = (5 x 7,800) + (5 x 9,350) = 85,750 points. With those points, he/she surely have big chance to become World No.1 unless there are better player who able to win All 10 SS/P tournaments in a row (that's maybe impossible IMO to have such magic players sweep all 10 titles available).
By changing the points awarded to the players like runner-up got a half of winner's points, the above example by become 10 times runner-up didn't change the possibility to remain as No.1 because simple not easy to find another better players that able doing such super consistency by winning all 10 SS/P in 52-weeks period.
Son Wan Ho was No.1 with highest points at that time and he had better points than his competitors.
He was WC semifinalist (8,400 points), DEN SSP runner-up (9,350 points), Dubai SSF '16, MAS SSP & INA SSP semifinalist (7,700 points), JPN SS '16 & KOR SS '17 semifinalist (6,420 points), KOR GPG champion (7,000 points), his lowest point included: FRA SS '16 quarter-finalist (5,040 points).
That's shown his consistency without being a winners at all and slightly still above others.
This one is extreme though. Not surprised if many 'upsets' will occur next year.....
On the other hand, this will also decrease the available spots for lower ranked player to participate in more money-rewarding tournament, hindering the increase of income for players ranked around 75-100
The new BWF Regulations 2018 mention GPG as BWF World Tour Level 5 and GP as BWF World Tour Level 6.
So, I think they aren't using GP/GPG term anymore.