Tennis-ATP World Tour rankings

Flavor, what version of the ranking did you read?­ davydenko's name doesn't appear in the top 10,­ not even in the top 20.

There's one thing i dont get: Nadal reached semis­ in Paris Masters last year which means he got 320­ points for that, this year he was absent due to injury,­ but didnt lose those points in the rankings! how does­ this system work?

To Sofija and other ATP Ranking sceptics,

I understand­ the frustration of a player doing well and losing­ points because he did better last year.

The ATP system­ measures performance over exactly 12 months. It does­ not measure 13 months, 2 years or lifetime achievement.­ Consequently every tournament counts just once.

The­ current system is fair.

Click Thumbs Up if you agree.

Dean Knez I agree with you! Djokovici is number 3, so­ why to much fuss about the system? Also I agree that­ the system should be adjusted, but for now we get it as­ it is!

Let me break the stale debate up...Marin Cilic needs to­ fire his coach Bob Brett ASAP as he has been the­ ugliest disappointment of 2010. After an early form in­ winning a couple of tournaments and a SF at the Aussie­ Open, the season has imploded on him to the point where­ he regularly lost matches to allcomers in the early­ rounds of all major and 1000 and 500 tournaments. 2010­ was an opportunity to break into top 8 what with­ Tsonga, DelPotro and Roddick injuries and struggles yet­ Cilic delivered nothing. He now finds himself ranked­ behind journeyman players like Youzhny and Melzer and­ with Ivan Ljubicic (a pre-retirement veteran only two­ places behind in the rankings) breathing down his neck­ in the new rankings! Fire Bob Brett now please and find­ someone to motivate you to reach your God-given­ potential. Remember that potential is nothing, results­ are everything...

IONEL, we get that you hate Djokovic, just move on. It­ is really pathetic. The ATP system takes into account­ 18 tournaments (4GS, 9 Masters, 3xATP500 and 2xATP250.­ Your opinion does not matter, the points system is the­ same for all and encompasses results in a 52 week­ period. There is no conspiracy so if Murray was better­ than Djokovic than he would have been ranked higher. He­ is not and for a reason; Work it out genius!

The system is the same for everybody! Djokovici is­ number 3, but I think Murray is better than him, so I­ guess Murray should be nr.3, and then Djokovici goes to­ nr. 4! So the system is not done by Nadal or Federer!­ So let's take it as it is!

Federer won AO and one master tournament! Djokovici I­ think none!

let me get this straight, baghdatis reached the final­ of the kremlin cup and was deducted points to reach­ 20th place? can someone pls explain how this stupid­ ranking system works?

To samy:

You must like this:
Federer has many records­ to brake, like:
slam dunks per game;
fastest­ lap;
champion league goals;
making the largest burger­ of all times; etc.
And, you know what i like it too.

Djokovic was better than Federer in 3/4 GS this year.­ Rankings are there to reflect that... don't really­ see what's the problem...

dean! you know NOTHING!!!! nadal is already confirmes­ as year-ending number one!!! and he will be for some­ time, believe! roger is done...he will never break the­ great pete sampras' recor!!! and i like it ;)

Judy, you're outrageously funny, Fedex is­ definitely playing like he is holding a shovel. I still­ can't stop laughing even as am typing this. Luv how­ you put it. The ranking is very fair, so any conspiracy­ theories are just plain stupid. RAFA for life

The ran(lng system puzzles me and at tlmes seems harsh­ Ll(e as someone sald Delpotro wlLL now lose 2000­ ran(lng polnts because he won't defend hls­ tltLe...as to whether he would have won thls year..lts­ anyone's guess..but at the end of the day lts falr­ ln the sense that lt appLles to all players ln the­ ATP...lt happened to Rafa last year when he was unable­ to defend hls tltle at Wlmbledon...but he fought hls­ way bac( up. Glven how competltlve the men's tour­ ls...a loss of 1000 or 500 polnts could push you 3 or­ four spots down especlally lf those rlght behlnd you­ perform well...and guess what? l wouldn't prefer lt­ any other way:) the sport ls becomlng lncreaslngly more­ competltlve. l read somewhere 6 of the top 10 ln 2009­ have been replaced by new players thls year.. thls ls­ what we want..hungry players.. thus excltlng tennls!..

Well done to Roger. His comeback trail starts now!­ While he is pretty unlikely to finish the year as world­ no. 1, (although not statistically impossible), by­ Wimbledon next year I expect that he will return to­ no.1, if he keeps up this mental attitude, and not be­ too non-chalant about the Masters Tournaments.­ Unfortunate for Fish, though, having put up a spirited­ fight, only to end up as 2nd best. Once again, the­ thought of the skewed unfair ranking system comes to­ mind. I certainly think that Fish deserved more than­ 600 points. 700, 750 sounded more decent.

Other­ ranking-based sports are not that heavily skewed­ towards the winner, and rightfully so. While I agree­ that to the victor belongs the spoils, we should not­ undermine the considerable efforts put in for the­ runner up, who won all but the final match, having­ played as many as the champion. Getting a measly 60%­ points given to the winner. Thats not cool. Even poorer­ still are the valiant S-finalists and Q-finalists!­ Especially so in a GS setting. Reward consistency, I­ always say.

ATP ought to have a look at some other­ examples of ranking-based sports. I listed F1 as an­ example, where the winner gets 25 points and runner-up­ get 18, which is 72% of the winner's points. The­ lower tier finishers' points are scaled down in a­ somewhat arithmetic manner (15, 12, 10, 8, 6, etc.),­ not geometric.

Other examples:
Badminton World­ Championships - Winner = 200, Finalist = 150 (75%), SF­ = 100, QF=60, R16 = 30, R32 = 15. While its not exactly­ arithmetic progression, but its fairer to people who go­ perform well and goes deep into the tournament.

My 2­ cents worth...

I forgot! What about Serena Williams? For her`s threats­ she was paying a 10 000 $ punishment, for incident at­ US Open last year. If that happen to Jelena Jankovic or­ Novak Djokovic they would have no chances to play next­ GS! 10 000 $ is for Serena the same as 0.0001 euro for­ me! But she is american girl, so that is enough!

What is Davydenko doing in the top 10

The ranking system works very well. The winner takes it­ all as they say and so it should be. A looser should­ get quite a bit less points compared to the winner. If­ the ranking system gets tweaked with more points for­ loosers, we will end up awarding consistent players in­ a more favorable way compared to winners. The latter is­ what they do on the WTA tour , where you often have a­ first ranked player without a single slam title. We­ don't want that on the ATP tour. Rather continue to­ drive the winning mentality.