Year-End #1 vs. ATP ranked #1 at year's end

[Moxie]

^ Ha! I was just about to post the same link. Anyway, it's not "Player of the Year." They are designated "World Champions."

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Thanks fashionista!

GSM: you lazy bum, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITF_World_Champions

Nole won it the last 3 years.

No worries,Novak happens to be my next fav player after Rafa...I have followed his career since 2007..

 

[Billie]

Moxie, they need to have rolling ranking points, otherwise when they start in January nobody would have any points and how would they rank the players. For those rankings, they count all tournaments within a year (that is when you hear - Nole defends 1000 in IW for example) so before that tournament starts next year, those 1000 points will drop from his total ranking, and he will then gain any points he earns from that tournament. Those points will be added to both Race ranking (that starts from 0 at the beginning of the season - they count towards WTF participation) and they will add those to his overall ranking as well. Now he won this tournament last year, so in order to remain the same in the overall ranking, he needs to win it again. Anything less than that, let's say he loses the final next year and will gain 600 points. But because of his success last year (1000 vs 600 now), he will actually lose 400 ranking points on this tournament alone.

At the end of the year (because they will go through all tournaments in a calendar year, these 2 rankings will be the same).

Makes sense?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Thanks fashionista!

GSM: you lazy bum, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITF_World_Champions

Nole won it the last 3 years.

I was busy reading that very same page (before seeing your current post) and came
here to post the link and you beat me.

So, they do designate someone as the "world champion' (that is the term they use,
but it is conceptually same as what we were calling by "player of the year").

But, they don't have a formula for it except that they consider only performances
in ITF events such as GSs, Davis Cup and Hopman cup. Instead a committee votes
on who should be the player of the year. It does not matter too much as there is
no trophy, money or points. Just the bragging rights. Finally, because it is a vote
by a committee, there is some controversy. See the web page to learn how they
screwed Edberg because they did not like some of his comments.

Since the advent of ranking systems, only in four years the YE #1 was different
from "player of the year". One of them is last year when Rafa finished as YE #1
whereas Novak got the "player of the year" designation.

 

[Billie]

^ Ha! I was just about to post the same link. Anyway, it's not "Player of the Year." They are designated "World Champions."

I could swear I read articles when they declared them "Player of the Year" but the notion is the same and there is an actual award, that was my point to GSM.

 

[Billie]

Thanks fashionista!

GSM: you lazy bum, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITF_World_Champions

Nole won it the last 3 years.

I was busy reading that very same page (before seeing your current post) and came
here to post the link and you beat me.

So, they do designate someone as the "world champion' (that is the term they use,
but it is conceptually same as what we were calling by "player of the year").

But, they don't have a formula for it except that they consider only performances
in ITF events such as GSs, Davis Cup and Hopman cup. Instead a committee votes
on who should be the player of the year. It does not matter too much as there is
no trophy, money or points. Just the bragging rights. Finally, because it is a vote
by a committee, there is some controversy. See the web page to learn how they
screwed Edberg because they did not like some of his comments.

Since the advent of ranking systems, only in four years the YE #1 was different
from "player of the year". One of them is last year when Rafa finished as YE #1
whereas Novak got the "player of the year" designation.

I was just joking with that "lazy bum", hopefully you got that?

Yeah, I know, there are controversies about it from time to time, like last year. They really don't mean a lot, just maybe something they can add on their list of accomplishments when all is said and done.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I was just joking with that "lazy bum", hopefully you got that?

I got that, but could not resist denying it though.

 

[Billie]

It could be a little wild and wooly this autumn.

Yeah, I think it is going to be crazy and hopefully very exciting! We are going to have exciting matches, titles, babies, distractions, you name it!

 

[Billie]

I was just joking with that "lazy bum", hopefully you got that?

I got that, but could not resist denying it though.

After all these years, I sometimes assume people will get my posts and then when I post them I realize: wait a minute, how the heck he is supposed to know what you mean or if you are joking.:laydownlaughing

 

[Moxie]

^ Billie, that's the part I already got, the rolling rankings. I couldn't see past the point differential in the live-rankings. Essentially the "Race to London" points are the same as if you already take off the points that they're defending to the end of the year. As I said, I finally get it. :spacecadet:

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^ Billie, that's the part I already got, the rolling rankings. I couldn't see past the point differential in the live-rankings. Essentially the "Race to London" points are the same as if you already take off the points that they're defending to the end of the year. As I said, I finally get it. :spacecadet:

Good that finally you got it. :clap

 

[Billie]

^^ Until next year

Just joking, Mox!!!!!!:lolz:

 

[Moxie]

^ Ha! I was just about to post the same link. Anyway, it's not "Player of the Year." They are designated "World Champions."

I would have said the same, but I was making the semantic distinction for GSM, it's all the same.

I could swear I read articles when they declared them "Player of the Year" but the notion is the same and there is an actual award, that was my point to GSM.

It could be a little wild and wooly this autumn.

Yeah, I think it is going to be crazy and hopefully very exciting! We are going to have exciting matches, titles, babies, distractions, you name it!

I think so, too! Surely things seem more up for grabs than usual, and, with Switzerland (read: Roger) in the DC finals, there'll be far more interest than usual. So instead of things winding down towards the end of the season, they seem to be heating up. Good times!

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think in order to truly call the beginning of new times and changing of guards, some
new player should clinch YE #1. That will not happen this year, as YE #1 is virtually certain
to be either Novak, Roger or Rafa. Actually one of them was YE #1 for the last ten years
since 2004.

Will 2015 be different?

 

[Moxie]

I think in order to truly call the beginning of new times and changing of guards, some
new player should clinch YE #1. That will not happen this year, as YE #1 is virtually certain
to be either Novak, Roger or Rafa. Actually one of them was YE #1 for the last ten years
since 2004.

Will 2015 be different?

Myself, I didn't say either of those things, but I do think 2015 will be different to what we have gotten used to expecting, as 2014 was. I don't think it will bring a new YE #1, though. Depending on Rafa, and Murray, I suppose, but those guys should still be fit to duke it out with Djokivic, with others still working their way in. Maybe next year is another transition year, like this was. But I do wonder what the landscape looks like in 2016. (Olympic year. Some folks hanging in for that....and 2017?? Probably a whole new ballgame.)

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Nadal is the only guy that we are pretty sure will be winning at least one slam in 2016.
Even if he eventually loses Roland Garros, he'll come back with a vengeance to reclaim it.
Apart from Nadal, the landscape could be completely different by 2016 or 2017.

 

[Fiero425]

I think in order to truly call the beginning of new times and changing of guards, some
new player should clinch YE #1. That will not happen this year, as YE #1 is virtually certain
to be either Novak, Roger or Rafa. Actually one of them was YE #1 for the last ten years
since 2004.

Will 2015 be different?

Myself, I didn't say either of those things, but I do think 2015 will be different to what we have gotten used to expecting, as 2014 was. I don't think it will bring a new YE #1, though. Depending on Rafa, and Murray, I suppose, but those guys should still be fit to duke it out with Djokivic, with others still working their way in. Maybe next year is another transition year, like this was. But I do wonder what the landscape looks like in 2016. (Olympic year. Some folks hanging in for that....and 2017?? Probably a whole new ballgame.)

I suppose something momentous could happen, but every time we write off the top echelon, they surprise us with historic efforts! Since these top 3 players have taken over the tour in '04, there's only been 3 other players to win a major! I've been calling the also-rans "gutless," but I guess I just have to hand it to the BIG 3, "THEY TRULY OWN IT!" I can't imagine who or what will change it! Roger will be upset periodically, but Nole and Rafa will continue on for the next 2 or 3 years! The USO occurred with something new, but will it be a trend? I just don't think so! There's no reason Nole shouldn't continue his dominance, Federer taking an elixir of youth periodically like the mummy, and the rest of the tour is too afraid to knock Nadal off on a regular basis! Both Wawrinka and Cilic are on the way out and I can't see either of them backing up their lone major with another!

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nadal is the only guy that we are pretty sure will be winning at least one slam in 2016.

How the hell can we be pretty sure about something two years from now?

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Nadal is the only guy that we are pretty sure will be winning at least one slam in 2016.

How the hell can we be pretty sure about something two years from now?

You don't go from winning 9 out of 10 to disappearing off the face of the earth within 2 years.
At least let the guy lose a final or semi-final a few times.
And I said "pretty sure", not sure.

 

[Federberg]

Nadal is the only guy that we are pretty sure will be winning at least one slam in 2016.

How the hell can we be pretty sure about something two years from now?

You don't go from winning 9 out of 10 to disappearing off the face of the earth within 2 years.
At least let the guy lose a final or semi-final a few times.
And I said "pretty sure", not sure.

Perhaps next time you'll be better served by saying "I" instead of "we":blush: