Not sure how the destination Dubai point system works, but I am very surprised that Lee Chong Wei did not make it. Based on recent form LCW is the best player on the planet, winning 3 superseries titles in a row. He even beat his nemesis Chen Long twice in the process. Still can't believe he did not make it.
It's exactly that. It's based on a point system on the 12 super series tournaments. Max of two of the same nations, and the top 8 players/teams from each discipline. LCW simply did not gain enough points.
LCW only played 6 SS's, starting from Japan Open. He only earned 37000 points. That's why he is only ranked #15 now. The #8 seeds in Hu Yun who played in 12 SS's got about 46000 points.
Also, look at the Chinese holy trinity - LXR has actually won 2 tournaments, WYH and WSX haven't. How come she is still behind WSX and WYH in ranking. My point exactly. He won a quarter of the tournaments, behind only Chen Long. How come that is not enough?! The point system seems strange.
Ah I was so surprised to actually see this thread. See my friends all lamented non stop good players Like Lee Chong Wei who won 3 SS title never get to qualify. And then some players who didn't even win any SS titles can qualify to play. My friends said the system itself is very weird and extremely weird. I don't think so I need even to mention the name of the players who did not win any SS titles here as everyone already know the answer. Then we have also seen players who are not up to standard but yet play in this Dubai SS finals being trashed in this tournament making it look even more obvious. Whatever it is BWF system is certainly strange here. The best player for SS tournaments this year is definitely Chen Long as he has already won 5 SS titles this year. Congratulations. Then the second best player is definitely Lee Chong Wei as he won 3 SS titles this year. So to talk about it Lee Chong Wei is not even allowed to play. Very controversial issue here and I just don't want to dwell into it.
LOL.....is this a joke thread? LCW didn't qualify because he couldn't collect sufficient points..........Missed out from All England,Malaysian Open,Indian Open,Singapore Open,Indonesian Open,Australian Open,.................all 8 qualified players collected sufficient points from these tourneys........................... And then,upon his return....his first three SS results were pathetic...........which didn't help him either.. He then won three SS but points collected were still not enough,as simple as that...................What's all the crying about? Rules were simple....Top 8 players with most SS points will qualify..............LCW didn't....
This! Completely agree. No, not at all. If I was the SSF director, making the rules, this is how it would be: Rank 1 : Chen Long - 5 titles Rank 2: Lee Chong Wei - 3 titles Rank 3: Kento Momota - 2 titles Rank 4: Lin Dan - 1 title, 1 runner-up Rank 5: K. Srikanth - 1 title Rank 6: Viktor Axelsen - 3 runner-up Rank 7: Jan O Jorgensen - 2 runner-up for rank 8, Hu Yun, Ajay Jayaram, Tommy Sugiarto, CTC and THW all have 1 runner-up awards. So we see who has lost in semi-finals most. If there is a tie, we see who has lost in quarter finals most, and so on. This makes a lot of sense, I believe.
It's not about the titles You get 2500 points for just showing up in Round 1...............Had LCW been playing from start of the year,he would have easily qualified....... I am satisfied with current rule...........No need to change it..........The better you perform,more points you get.....The more you play,more you get rewarded.
Unfortunately for you, that is exactly the same criteria which uses the points system. With the points system, it is better - it rewards consistency. Two semifinal finishes outweighs 1 winner and non-entry. Nine Tailed Fox gave a perfect explanation.
The only points controversy I have is that the world and Olympic champions and runners up should get even more ranking points. I can't remember offhand but they get only an extra 1000 points or so over SSP.
Precisely, the SS Standings is based on total number of points won in SS/PSS tournaments only, not number of SS/PSS titles won. The same goes for BWF World Ranking. That's right , consistency in an equal number of tournaments played carries more weight than winning one or two titles but tanking in the rest. Of course, those who played too few tournaments, for whatever reasons, also lose out. Then, finally, to decide who is the best for the year, the top 8 in SS Standings, including automatic qualification for the Olympic/World Champion, are invited to fight it out in a special tournament organized on a group stage followed by elimination stage competition. As for the argument that LCW is the best based on recent/current form,that's only for now, but for the whole year, I'd argue Chen Long is the best as he not only beat LCW twice (though he also lost twice to him), he also won more titles, including the WC, not to mention he also beat Lin Dan twice. I believe BWF recognised that , which is why Chen Long, and not LCW, is awarded the Best Male Player of The Year. Perhaps, it might be a good idea for some rich sponsor(s) to start a special invitational tournament where the contenders or candidates are selected by a different set of criteria with input based on nominees by popular vote, for example, other than the top few ranked players according to BWF WR/SS Standings, we can also extend invitations to the most in-form player the previous three months, or any highly regarded player who just came back from injury or personal long break, or highly promising young up-and-comers, child prodigies, etc - but still limited to 8 or at most 10 participants for each discipline. Maybe, consider featuring only the MS and WS, the two blue-riband events, leaving out the doubles. However, my worry is, with the yearlong tournament schedule already so crowded and tight, where to fit in such a tournament. Anything I feel strongly is that the prize money has to be lucrative enough, in the millions where even the last-placed finisher gets a tidy sum, otherwise the idea is dead even before we debate about it. One more thing, to give it more legitimacy and status, say, called it The Tournament of Champions, or bring back the World Cup and named it after the sponsor or a former great player ( how about Zhao Jianhua World Cup ?). Instead of a yearly affair, make it bi-annual, to enhance its value even more. Pardon me, just letting my imagination run wild.
Talking bout rules ya. BWF cannot give wild card? I remember there was a tournament back in 2013 where the rules were bent. Were you here yet? Afterall rules weren't that simple. LMAO!
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!! Need a Wild Card??? There was Wild Card,,,,but only for World Champions..........That's how TQ/ZYL are playing in this tournament.... And Yeah........BWF gonna change the rules for mighty LCW ....... After singing all Year LONG....'Top 8 PLAYERS in SS Rankings will QUALIFY''........ How could they change the rule?................
You want to talk about bending of the rules? Look no further than "that tournament" back in 2007 where a certain country gave itself 5 wildcards. Seeing that you joined in Aug 08, maybe you didn't know of this. LMAO!
I can understand that BWF want to promote participation in its SS tournaments. But to give so many points for participation with early exit, compared to winning quite a few but not going to all tournaments, is out of proportion. It makes this tourney lose its credibility.
On the topic of consistency, are players awarded bonus points for winning back to back SS titles? I feel that it would adequately reward players who strive to maintain top form from tourney to tourney, and perhaps motivate runners-up to put in that extra effort. For example, LCW could have been awarded a "Hat Trick" bonus. IIRC, Lee/Yoo have been winning a couple of back to back titles too?
Nope, The point for being at the next round should be a higher magnitude than the previous round, and being a champion should get greater points. That was the thinking why a win in football is now awarded 3 points, not 2 points like before. If the point system is like this, more and more player will just show up to win the points but show a pathetic display losing on early rounds yet still qualify.
The world ranking system and the destination Dubai ranking system are 2 different things. I don't see why they have to operate in a similar manner. People want to see the best players at the super-series finals. If someone who won a quarter of of the tournaments doesn't get to qualify for the top 8, then it looks like a joke. Personally, I think the point difference is fair. The SSPs are arguably the hardest tournament to win purely based on the level of competition, as they are mandatory for top players and there are no restrictions. Also, many of the SSPs have a lot of history(and money) with them, as opposed to the world championships comparatively. If tomorrow the tennis world starts a "world championship", would the grand slams suddenly lose importance? And LCW might have even won the well deserved world championship if not for that wild card! Yes, this! Very good point. Nice thought. Of course! Don't just encourage players to participate. Encourage them to win.
