NEW WTA ranking system in 2014

Hoergren

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,849
Reactions
1,663
Points
113
Age
75
Location
Denmark
The following is taken from TennisForum but I think it'll be of interest for this forum too so here you are:

The WTA Board of Directors has approved an adjustment to the current WTA Ranking Point Distribution. The new ranking points will be introduced over a 12-month period from the start of the 2014 season.

The changes to the current ranking rules are:

- At both WTA and ITF level, the round to round distribution has been standardized

- Players are better rewarded for winning and going deep in tournaments

- First round points at Mandatory tournaments have been doubled

- Qualifying points at Internationals have been enhanced

- Grand Slam qualifying points have been adjusted to lessen the difference with WTA Premier events qualifying points, which have similarly-ranked qualifying draws

*New points will be added only as 2013 results drop off so change will be gradual.


Elements for Change

1. Grand Slam QLF reduced from 60/50/40/2 to 40/30/20/2

2. QLF Pts: GS - 40, PM - 30, P5 - 30, Premier - 25, International - 18

3. GS/WTA Round to Round Distribution: 65/60/55/55/55/55

4. WTA 125K and ITF Round to Round Distribution: 60/60/50/50/50

5. 1st Round Grand Slam and Premier Mandatory = 10 vs 5 / 1st Round Premier Mandatory Qualifying 2 vs 1

6. WTA Qualifier receives 45-50% at Premiers, 57% at Grand Slams, and 60% at Internationals of 1st Round Main Draw Win

7. ITF New 25+H Level with 60 pts to Winner…… ITF 15K receives 5 more points to distance from 10K
ITF 75K, 5 more points to winner. ITF 50+H, and 50K, 10 more points to winner.

Example

Grand Slam:

W 2000
F 1300
SF 780
QF 430
4R 240
3R 130
2R 70
1R 10

QR 40
Q3R 30
Q2R 20
Q1R 2

Internationals

W 280
F 180
SF 110
QF 60
2R 30
1R 1

QR 18
Q3R 14
Q2R 10
Q1R 1

Well what do you think about these changes - good or bad?
 

ozza

Pro Tour Player
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
285
Reactions
0
Points
0
It's good for players who win things (anything) and make a lot of finals. Bad for players that don't.

In the short term, it's good for player's who post a lot of points at the end of this season, and bad for player's who have a lot of their ranking to defend early next season.
 

Correspondent Kiu

Correspondent
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
4,372
Reactions
52
Points
48
Location
Maryland
I think the majors carry too many points for the winner.
Semifinalist get 780 points. finalist get 1300 points and the winner gets 2000.
That's 1220 points for two matches.

They should cap the points at 1600-1800
 

ozza

Pro Tour Player
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
285
Reactions
0
Points
0
Kiu said:
I think the majors carry too many points for the winner.
Semifinalist get 780 points. finalist get 1300 points and the winner gets 2000.
That's 1220 points for two matches.

They should cap the points at 1600-1800

They have to make the grand slams have many points. It's the main events in the public eye, and they want the winners to remain in the public eye.

We have a scenario in this country, where a lot of people only watch Wimbledon. So you now have journalists wondering where the two Wimbledon finalists have disappeared too. They thought it was some kind of new order in the women's game, but obviously it was far from that.
 

Sundaymorningguy

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
6,387
Reactions
1,762
Points
113
Location
Norfolk, VA
I think this says to players you better come to play and go far. I think this point system would make people fight more on the court as they aren't going to get too many points otherwise if they don't make it far. It looks like they lessened the points in some rounds of the slams.
 

tented

Administrator
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
21,703
Reactions
10,580
Points
113
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
I don't see anything about this on the WTA's website, including their recent news section. And this would be big news. :s
 

ozza

Pro Tour Player
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
285
Reactions
0
Points
0
tented said:
I don't see anything about this on the WTA's website, including their recent news section. And this would be big news. :s

It's because its not been publicly released yet. They only decided on it at a board meeting recently. It's from WTA Player Zone (the player's section of the WTA website).
 

Correspondent Kiu

Correspondent
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
4,372
Reactions
52
Points
48
Location
Maryland
Hoergren,
How does this new system work for 900-1000 point premier events?
How about the 470 point versions?
 

Hoergren

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,849
Reactions
1,663
Points
113
Age
75
Location
Denmark
[attachment=19]
Kiu said:
Hoergren,
How does this new system work for 900-1000 point premier events?
How about the 470 point versions?

It's not official yet but coolfish on tennisforum has made this view:See attachment
 

Attachments

  • WTA_new_ranking_unofficial.pdf
    23.4 KB · Views: 422

tented

Administrator
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
21,703
Reactions
10,580
Points
113
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
ozza said:
tented said:
I don't see anything about this on the WTA's website, including their recent news section. And this would be big news. :s

It's because its not been publicly released yet. They only decided on it at a board meeting recently. It's from WTA Player Zone (the player's section of the WTA website).

Thank you, Ozza. :)
 

Calvy

Masters Champion
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
905
Reactions
0
Points
0
my sherona said:
by this new rules maria will be number 1 early next year.

Huh, are Serena and Vika retiring at years end?
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
I think they should reintroduce extra points for causing a significant upset in WTA.
It used to be there before.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
44,036
Reactions
15,152
Points
113
GameSetAndMath said:
I think they should reintroduce extra points for causing a significant upset in WTA.
It used to be there before.

By that, do you mean "bonus points" for beating a player of a (x-#) higher rank? It could certainly make things volatile, but I'm sure it would be controversial.