Pairs who haven't won any tournament are in the WTF? Rankireddy/Shetty are ranked 10. Of the 9 pairs ahead of them, only one (1!) has not won a tournament, and this pair is ranked #8.
The "many" tournaments the Indian pair have won are also not ten, or five, or some other outstanding number, but three.
What's more remarkable is that a pair with this quality has managed to crash out 4 times in the first round and 4 times in the second round over the course of the year. They've played 14 tournaments and 8 of them, 57%, resulted in early exits. In fact, apart from their three tournament wins, they only managed one other final.
I also don't like the system, as it grants a lot of participation points for early rounds losses, but it is what it is and it has been that way for quite some time. (If you're interested: Rankireddy and Shetty have received 9550 of their 78590 points for losing four first round matches. 12% of their points are from not winning a single match. If you factor in the secound round exits, they've gotten ~30000 points for winning four games. That's quite generous, don't you think?)
You make it sound like the system is rigged, or there's some global conspiracy going on, when in fact Rankireddy/Shetty have simply not been good enough. If they are smart, they are not asking themselves "why is the system so unfair?" but rather "why have we been so s..t for most of the year?"
