PDA

View Full Version : Do rankings even mean anything in the WTA?


jackson vile
06-02-2012, 04:33 PM
Many of us are aware of the most recent results at the FO, not to mention results in the past years as well. When we take a look at the rankings the results seen to do very little to represent the best players in the world.

Furthermore, this draws concerns about the weight we put on total titles and points systems altogether. What is the point of have a truck load of titles if you can't win when you desire/need it the most? We must questions the men's results as well.

Finally I have to ask; Is women's tennis, the WTA, dead? :confused:

Evan77
06-02-2012, 05:08 PM
Many of us are aware of the most recent results at the FO, not to mention results in the past years as well. When we take a look at the rankings the results seen to do very little to represent the best players in the world.

Furthermore, this draws concerns about the weight we put on total titles and points systems altogether. What is the point of have a truck load of titles if you can't win when you desire/need it the most? We must questions the men's results as well.

Finally I have to ask; Is women's tennis, the WTA, dead? :confused:
nope ... the whole WTA ***** right now is just ***** ... I tried watching Azarenka yesterday and she was screaming so much that I had to turn off my receiver. and the whole ranking system is just, whatever ... at least when it comes to guys you have Djoko, Fed and Rafa showing up at all major tournaments

with girls, it's like, if you are famous like Serena, Klijsters or Venus, you play whatever you like feel playing (mostly slams and few other tournaments, well, no wonder Wozniacki ended up being #1 for what, 2 years, without winning a major)... too many princesses.. hate what the WTA turned out to be :mad:

Mustard
06-02-2012, 05:18 PM
Where are the mentally tough players in the WTA like Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Austin and Sanchez Vicario these days?

Ralph
06-02-2012, 05:25 PM
Is it easy money? Are the WTA making far better money in modern day comparison to the players mentioned above in their day? For the Everts, Graffs etc...Did they have to work harder? I'm not saying that was the case, am just throwing a thought out there.

Gaudio2004
06-02-2012, 06:23 PM
Where are the mentally tough players in the WTA like Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Austin and Sanchez Vicario these days?

Certainly none that are as talented or as strong as you have mentioned exist, but mentally tough players are still there in the women's game - Azarenka's start to the year was due to being extremely mentally tough and not losing many matches in which she could have easily lost, Sharapova needs no words for how brutal she can (and has been) in early rounds and we saw Serena dominating just about everyone in Madrid and Charleston.

Kanepi almost failed to serve out the match against Wozniacki today due to nerves and knowing that Wozniacki wasn't going to give the match to her freely.

The likes of Azarenka, Radwanska, Sharapova, the young American players (McHale, Stephens, King), the new German trio (Barthel, Kerber, Goerges) and a few of the selected old guard (Serena, Kuzntesova, Wozniacki, Clijsters), the Italians (Errani, Schiavone, Pennetta) are all in my view mentally tough players as they have been brought up with a professional approach, as this article explains (http://backhanddropshot.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/the-best-thing-to-pop-up-in-womens-tennis-for-the-last-20-years/), despite no Graf or Navratilova like personality, the WTA has a different brand now, certainly stronger than the period between 2008-early 2011 where the WTA was just a mess.

zanabel
06-02-2012, 06:25 PM
the number one ranking is azarenka and i agree with it, so yes it means a lot :)

TheF1Bob
06-02-2012, 06:34 PM
Thw whole WTA lacks credibility. Anybody in the top 50 could be the No.1 player of the world.

zanabel
06-02-2012, 06:36 PM
azarenka is dominating so i think she is the number one and deserves it!

nadal_slam_king
06-02-2012, 06:46 PM
The people who always say Serena is the real number one aren't looking too flash now.

Evan77
06-02-2012, 06:53 PM
Where are the mentally tough players in the WTA like Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Austin and Sanchez Vicario these days?
good, luck, you won't find them ...

Evan77
06-02-2012, 07:00 PM
The people who always say Serena is the real number one aren't looking too flash now.
wow, I'm impressed, you are not talking about Nadal, lol. Serena, nowadays doesn't really care about tennis ... I guess she has other priorities ... I remember, even back in 2007 I think, when she lost to Justine and at her press conference, talking some BS how she is going to be poor 'if she can't play her top level' right, how much money do you need darhling? ... oh, oh, lol,

egn
06-02-2012, 07:37 PM
I'm going to argue in defense of the current top 4 in the WTA. They are probably the strongest top 4 we have had since the Henin/Clijsters/Williams era. These 4 woman, ignoring the shrieking, when are on their game are good to watch. Azarenka, Sharapova and Kvitova at their best will actually hit MORE WINNERS than errors and when they are playing good will be close to even. Not to mention they have some variety in their games as of late. I hope they stay around.

To go through them in order.

Victoria Azarenka is current #1, she finally has put her mental game together and is 35-3 this year. She has a major and two premier totals in addition to another title. She has been in 6 finals this year in total and has been a strong force. Let's not forget clay is her worst surface, but she has been looking good this week and will probably make it to at least the quarters if not the semis, as Stosur will prove to be tough, but Stosur is a strong clay court player and a major winner herself.

Maria Sharapova current #2, might not have won a major in a while, but has still won three in the past. She has been in two major finals over the past year as well as an additional major semi. Is 29-5 on the year, beat the reigning French Open champ in a clay premier one title, and is looking to easy have a 5+ title year and hopefully grab a major as well.

Radswanka might be the weak one in the barrel, her major performances haven't been great but she is doing strong in the rest of the tournaments and is 38-8 on the year. She probably should lighten up her load to be more fit for majors, as her match against Kusentsova looked as if she wasn't fit yet, but then again time will tell. However she is definitely a top 10 player and a top 5 player, the major results will come.

Petra Kvitova has arguably the biggest game on tour right now. She has been in a slump, but she is stronger on the faster surfaces. Her consistency still needs work, but it will come with time. She still has won a major, has a world tour championship title and is looking to make another major quarterfinal and possibly semi depending on if she can beat Li Na this year. However I imagine things pick up for her greatly when we hit the grass and fast hard court season.

Mustard
06-02-2012, 07:49 PM
Twenty years ago at this point, we'd be saying:

Monica Seles: Has won the French Open the last 2 years, has 5 majors overall, and has only missed one final in her last 25 tournaments. Tough as nails mentally. When under pressure, she goes onto the attack all the more, and it usually comes off. Clearly the best player in the world today (early June 1992).

Steffi Graf: The winner of 10 majors, including 2 French Open titles, as well as the famous 1988 Golden Grand Slam. Has been overtaken by Seles in the past year, but is also very tough mentally and undoubtedly the best athlete in the women's game.

Gabriela Sabatini: Has won the 1990 US Open, the 1988 WTA Championships, as well as winning the Rome title in 1991 and 1992 and beating Seles in the final both times, which puts her in an excellent position to possibly win the French Open as well. She also consistently reaches the latter stages in majors. Mentally, she is unpredictable, however.

Aranxta Sanchez Vicario: The 1989 French Open champion, beating a then dominant Graf in a huge upset. She fights for every single point like it's her last, and makes her opponents earn their victories.

DeShaun
06-02-2012, 08:15 PM
Is it easy money? Are the WTA making far better money in modern day comparison to the players mentioned above in their day? For the Everts, Graffs etc...Did they have to work harder? I'm not saying that was the case, am just throwing a thought out there.

Yeah, I suspect that the money is too easy for the work that they're actually putting in. I get an impression even further that a girl like Caroline was laughing all the way to the bank for having superb cardio and playing retriever tennis with a high-spin-producing racket--she was essentially stealing money as the world number 1, i.e., not adding very much value to the sport nor elevating it in any way meaningful in my opinion. It's not her fault for exploiting the status quo, but I am not backing down from my opinion of her and her game either.

t135
06-02-2012, 08:56 PM
The ranking equals how consistent the player wins. Which is a big deal, obviously. Winning is where it's at.

But in grand slams it doesn't seem to add up to much. There are some real deal players on the radar this year; Azarenka, Na, Sharapova, Serena, Stosur, Koerber, Kvitova, who have the guns to beat opponents into submission.

Shrieking aside, it will be interesting to see how this thing works out. Na and Sharapova pummeled a couple of players today.

sillymonkey
06-02-2012, 09:02 PM
Maybe the WTA is just going thru a "phase". Meaning it is a bit schizophrenic these days, compared to the dominance of the top three players on the men's side, but everything is cyclical. think of Martina or Steffi for instance.

egn
06-02-2012, 09:15 PM
Twenty years ago at this point, we'd be saying:

Monica Seles: Has won the French Open the last 2 years, has 5 majors overall, and has only missed one final in her last 25 tournaments. Tough as nails mentally. When under pressure, she goes onto the attack all the more, and it usually comes off. Clearly the best player in the world today (early June 1992).

Steffi Graf: The winner of 10 majors, including 2 French Open titles, as well as the famous 1988 Golden Grand Slam. Has been overtaken by Seles in the past year, but is also very tough mentally and undoubtedly the best athlete in the women's game.

Gabriela Sabatini: Has won the 1990 US Open, the 1988 WTA Championships, as well as winning the Rome title in 1991 and 1992 and beating Seles in the final both times, which puts her in an excellent position to possibly win the French Open as well. She also consistently reaches the latter stages in majors. Mentally, she is unpredictable, however.

Aranxta Sanchez Vicario: The 1989 French Open champion, beating a then dominant Graf in a huge upset. She fights for every single point like it's her last, and makes her opponents earn their victories.

Not saying those players aren't better, however rankings are who are the best at the moment and we are in a transition era. If Azarenka and Kvitova turn out to be multiple major winners then people won't be saying anything right. However compared to Wozniacki, Azarenka has actually been a strong number 1. She became number 1 by winning a major and followed it up going on an impressive run. There have been worse number 1s than Azarenka and I don't see Azarenka stopping at one major. However at this point in time, Azarenka is clearly the best player in the WTA right now and has earned her spot. It's not their fault their are no former greats still playing well. Rankings are based yearly. My point was for the first time in a while the rankings are lining up with the best players and actually mean something.

Three of the top 4 are still around in a major, and for the first time in a while people actually think they are favorites to win. Just look at the Australian Open, 3 of the top 4 in the semis and one of them walked away with it. The WTA actually has top players now. Has anyone outside of the top 4. Only one of the Premier Mandatory/5 has been won by someone not in the top 5 and it was won by Serena Williams, who I think we can argue is a great player. However Serena has proven to not be the best player in the world this year going out round 1 of the French Open. I think the rankings in the WTA are actually right for the first time ever, and am confident it will stay that way.

We don't have a Graf, Seles, Navratilova etc. but we have a bunch of talented players.

dudeski
06-02-2012, 09:31 PM
Many of us are aware of the most recent results at the FO, not to mention results in the past years as well. When we take a look at the rankings the results seen to do very little to represent the best players in the world.

Furthermore, this draws concerns about the weight we put on total titles and points systems altogether. What is the point of have a truck load of titles if you can't win when you desire/need it the most? We must questions the men's results as well.

Finally I have to ask; Is women's tennis, the WTA, dead? :confused:

So what you are saying is that Federer is not the GOAT because he only won all of his 16 slams due to lack of competition and also that Fed is an arrogant cross dresser?

Sentinel
06-02-2012, 10:40 PM
Serena is the real number one

+1. QFT.

10slams

egn
06-03-2012, 12:53 AM
+1. QFT.

10slams

...1st round exit. Hasn't won a major since 2010. Case and point.

Gizo
06-03-2012, 12:56 AM
The rankings pretty much stopped meaning anything after Henin retired (for the first time) in 2008.

Before then while the likes of Hingis, Davenport and Clijsters had spells as world no. 1 without a slam title in the 52 previous weeks, they were at least racking up non-slam titles and still consistently going deep at the slams.

When Jankovic first reached world no. 1, in August 2008, she had only won 1 title in the 52 previous weeks, reached just 2 more tournament finals in that time, and had never reached a grand slam final.

Wozniacki's year end no. 1 ranking in 2010 was at least more credible, but in 2011 it was a joke that she could play so badly for most of the second half of the year and still cling on to top spot.

Evan77
06-03-2012, 01:03 AM
I don't understand how any of you can watch that screaming freak Azarenka. I would arrest her for screaming so much. it should be illegal. If I wanted to see screaming girls I'd rather watch some porn than tennis. whatever dudes.

Gizo
06-03-2012, 01:10 AM
I do fear for the future success of women's tennis. Love them or loathe them. when Venus and Serena eventually retire it will lose many fans, diehead or casual, and especially in the US.

Henin wasn't a star like Serena, Venus, Hingis, Sharapova etc were/are, but her first retirement was disastrous for women's tennis and many people turned away. Many people simply won't care about the sport without Serena and Venus.

The sport is already struggling in Europe, as highlighted by how badly attended many tournaments are. Even at a tournament like Rome with such a rich history, the women's tournament was so badly attended until they combined it with the men's event.

There are so many Eastern European players in the tour, but a lot of those tennis federations don't have the money or the passion to put more tournaments there, and the ones that are there aren't so successful. Even when there were so many Russian players in the top 10 and 20 and competing for slams, the women's Kremlin Cup and Russia's home Fed Cup ties were played in front of a sea of empty seats.

Traditionally the European indoor season at the end of the year was so successful for the WTA, with great tennis and pretty well attended tournaments. It's funny how many girls seemed to save their best tennis for that time of the year and really come alive at those events.

Annoyingly the WTA for some reason decided to completely dismantle it.

egn
06-03-2012, 01:18 AM
Traditionally the European indoor season at the end of the year was so successful for the WTA, with great tennis and pretty well attended tournaments. It's funny how many girls seemed to save their best tennis for that time of the year and really come alive at those events.

Annoyingly the WTA for some reason decided to completely dismantle it.

Hingis 2000. Ridiculous play.

zanabel
06-03-2012, 01:36 AM
Hingis 2000. Ridiculous play.

my coach has a poster of hingis at the 1998 us open :)

Gizo
06-03-2012, 01:42 AM
Hingis 2000. Ridiculous play.

Yes Hingis in 2000, Dokic in 2001, Myskina in 2004, Davenport, Henin and Clijsters in numerous years, great times. You even had players like Vaidisova , Golovin and Schnyder coming alive and looking like world beaters in those tournaments.

From 2000-2007, it was disproportionate how many of the best matches in each of those those seasons seem to come at the end of year indoor tournaments.

Also from 2000-2007, there was at least one all-time classic match at the YEC every year, Hingis-Seles in 2000, Davenport-Clijsters in 2001, Serena-Capriati in 2002, Mauresmo-Henin in 2003, Serena-Mauresmo in 2004, Mauresmo-Pierce in 2005, Mauresmo-Clijsters in 2006 and Henin-Sharapova in 2007.

Moving the tournament to Doha from 2008-2010, in an empty stadium and outdoor conditions was a disaster.

Ralph
06-03-2012, 01:55 AM
Yeah, I suspect that the money is too easy for the work that they're actually putting in. I get an impression even further that a girl like Caroline was laughing all the way to the bank for having superb cardio and playing retriever tennis with a high-spin-producing racket--she was essentially stealing money as the world number 1, i.e., not adding very much value to the sport nor elevating it in any way meaningful in my opinion. It's not her fault for exploiting the status quo, but I am not backing down from my opinion of her and her game either.

Eloquent and validly written, I'd agree. I didn't think of it in respect to Caroline and technology. Good point.

jamesblakefan#1
06-03-2012, 07:10 AM
Where are the mentally tough players in the WTA like Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Austin and Sanchez Vicario these days?

Serena's still one of the mentally toughest of all time, regardless of her recent midgetry at times. Pova is pretty tough mentally as well. Let's not act like the WTA was full of mental giants in the past, even then you had players like Novotna and Sabatini who choked away huge matches.

adventure
06-03-2012, 07:36 AM
The WTA is a minor league sport. It just goes to show you how charismatic (and manipulative) of a figure BJK was to boycott the USO if she didn't receive equal pay, and to create the dubious 'battle of the sexes' against Riggs, who was nearing 60 years of age.

jamesblakefan#1
06-03-2012, 07:41 AM
The WTA is a minor league sport. It just goes to show you how charismatic (and manipulative) of a figure BJK was to boycott the USO if she didn't receive equal pay, and to create the dubious 'battle of the sexes' against Riggs, who was nearing 60 years of age.

WTA isn't a minor league sport. It's still the most successful women's professional sport in the world.

NadalAgassi
06-03-2012, 08:02 AM
No they mean nothing. Wozniacaki was computer #1 in 2010 and 2011 and everyone knew she wasnt the real #1 ever. Last year everyone knows she was the 5th or 6th player for the year even though the computer put her at #1, and it is brushed off as an irrelevance, heck many probably dont even know who was computer #1 as the WTA ranking system is so absurd even most WTA fans have tuned it out starting several years ago, as someone else sweeps every available Player of the Year award. In the WTA the #1 ranking from 2001 onwards (when they began the new ranking system) is a nothing achievement, carries no value, and adds nothing to your career. Years you are a legit #1 like Henin in 2006 and 2007, Serena in 2009 and 2010, it is meaningful, but only in the sense they are the people everyone knows were the #1 for those years anyway, it wouldnt matter what the computer said. The only purpose of WTA rankings at this point is seeding purposes, but the rankings are usually so out of place with reality that it might as well just be a random seeding of everyone anyway.

jamesblakefan#1
06-03-2012, 08:24 AM
The only purpose of WTA rankings at this point is seeding purposes, but the rankings are usually so out of place with reality that it might as well just be a random seeding of everyone anyway.

How are the rankings out of place currently?

#1 Vika - a slam, undefeated run to start the season w/ a few other premier title, YEC finalist, well deserved #1 despite her loss today.
#2 Masha - 2 slam finals, a few premier titles, consistent in most big events.
#3 Radwanska - no slam wins/finals/or semis but very strong in the premier events and consistent, even though she went out early at RG.
#4 Kvitova - a slam and YEC win, but inconsistent and a lot of early losses in premier events.
#5 Serena - a slam final and a few premier titles but a couple of early losses at the other slams and inconsistent form.
#6 Stosur - slam winner, premier final and semi
#7 Li - slam win still on her record, premier final

After that there's a bunch of inconsistent players with a few good results and some terrible ones (Woz, Bartoli). The only quibble would be Kvitova behind Raddy, but the events outside of the slams have to count for something. The problem in the past was slam winners like Clijsters and Serena who went missing for the other events out of the slams. The rankings are going to always take into account the entire season and not just the slams, so in that regard the difference now is the slam winners actually performing (somewhat) in the other events.

zagor
06-03-2012, 08:26 AM
What the hell is this? LOLville thread that isn't about Fed?

NadalAgassi
06-03-2012, 08:28 AM
How are the rankings out of place currently?

#1 Vika - a slam, undefeated run to start the season w/ a few other premier title, YEC finalist, well deserved #1 despite her loss today.
#2 Masha - 2 slam finals, a few premier titles, consistent in most big events.
#3 Radwanska - no slam wins/finals/or semis but very strong in the premier events and consistent, even though she went out early at RG.
#4 Kvitova - a slam and YEC win, but inconsistent and a lot of early losses in premier events.
#5 Serena - a slam final and a few premier titles but a couple of early losses at the other slams and inconsistent form.
#6 Stosur - slam winner, premier final and semi
#7 Li - slam win still on her record, premier final

After that there's a bunch of inconsistent players with a few good results and some terrible ones (Woz, Bartoli). The only quibble would be Kvitova behind Raddy, but the events outside of the slams have to count for something. The problem in the past was slam winners like Clijsters and Serena who went missing for the other events out of the slams. The rankings are going to always take into account the entire season and not just the slams, so in that regard the difference now is the slam winners actually performing (somewhat) in the other events.

I agree they currently make somewhat sense but that they do is just a coincidence. Ever since the new ranking system came out it is a crapshoot to whether the rankings will make any sense or not as last years rankings and many other instances prove, so the WTA rankings are still meaningless until they change it to a more justified and respected ranking system (eg- the 90s divisor system).
That isnt just my opinion, many others have said the same thing, including former WTA champions.

srinrajesh
06-03-2012, 09:04 AM
Where are the mentally tough players in the WTA like Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Austin and Sanchez Vicario these days?


In the women's sharapova, serena are supposed to be pretty tough mentally
and Azarenka has shown some good signs in the recent past as well.

soyizgood
06-03-2012, 09:14 AM
Why the whining now? If it's about the French Open, you shouldn't be surprised. The last #1 seed to win the French was Henin in 2007. If you look at the current top 10, none of them spell clay-court material.

Most players specialize on hardcourts while the oldies (Serena, Venus, Clijsters) are just content to play the majors and a few other events. At this point Venus and Clijsters are past their prime and injury-riddled. Serena can't dominate the tour now, even if she really wanted to.

Looking at the race standings you can see some changes kicking in the year at the top. Folks were complaining about Wozniacki at #1, but now she's #9. Folks wanted to see a slam winner at #1 and now you have Azarenka there. Now complaints about her and her shrieking being there. Sharapova, queen shrieker, will take #1 if she makes the FO final, which will bring out the ***** and haters in full force if that happens.

Some people are never happy. The top 10 is a decent bunch with 6 of them as slam champions. 8 of them have been to a slam final and 9 of them have been to a slam semifinal. WTA still has a bunch of headcases and mental midgets, but so does the ATP outside the top 3. New faces are coming up and some younger veterans are finding a groove, which really isn't the case on the ATP.

adventure
06-03-2012, 04:34 PM
WTA isn't a minor league sport. It's still the most successful women's professional sport in the world.

It's the "most successful" in large part due to the bizarre and unprecedented success of BJK imposing her "women's lib" agenda at the right time, and right place.

When it cannot function as a parasite off of the men's tour, the WTA is indeed a minor league sport. It certainly is from the standpoint of quality of play.

adventure
06-03-2012, 04:37 PM
Serena's still one of the mentally toughest of all time, regardless of her recent midgetry at times. Pova is pretty tough mentally as well. Let's not act like the WTA was full of mental giants in the past, even then you had players like Novotna and Sabatini who choked away huge matches.

Mentally tough? The one who goes on cursing fits and violent rages and crying jags? The one who threatens to kill judges and goes on endless tirades about umpires' allaged lack of inner beauty?!?

cluckcluck
06-03-2012, 08:28 PM
WTA= Weak Tennis Association

NadalAgassi
06-03-2012, 09:04 PM
The rankings pretty much stopped meaning anything after Henin retired (for the first time) in 2008.

Before then while the likes of Hingis, Davenport and Clijsters had spells as world no. 1 without a slam title in the 52 previous weeks, they were at least racking up non-slam titles and still consistently going deep at the slams.

When Jankovic first reached world no. 1, in August 2008, she had only won 1 title in the 52 previous weeks, reached just 2 more tournament finals in that time, and had never reached a grand slam final.

Wozniacki's year end no. 1 ranking in 2010 was at least more credible, but in 2011 it was a joke that she could play so badly for most of the second half of the year and still cling on to top spot.

Wozniacki's 2011 year end was the most undeserved #1 in the history of the game, even considering how poor everyone else was and that it came in probably the worst year of womens tennis in the history of the game. Kvitova was one of the crappiest year end #1s in history herself, but still was clearly the year end #1 in 2011 (the real one, the computer is irrelevant as already noted) and that the computer found a way to rank her below Wozniacki comparing their years defies imagination. Even Sharapova and Azarenka deserved to outrank Wozniacki last year, and possibly Na Li. I agree her 2010 year end #1 was atleast semi credible. I didnt agree with it, but wouldnt raise much fuss about it either. Wozniacki will have had the worst year ever for a computer year end #1 in the year 2011, 2000 or more years from now probably.

Someone on another forum came up with a more realistic ranking system and it showed Wozniacki would have ended 2010 #3 (a close 3rd behind Clijsters and Serena) and only #5 for 2011 under it. For all those who say it is unfair to judge someone just by winning a slam or not, she didnt have to win a slam to be #1 either year. In 2010 just winning the WTA Championships would have done it for her, but she failed to even do that, like she has failed in pretty much all ventures in her stint as bogus #1.

TennisLovaLova
06-04-2012, 12:28 AM
What's happening in the WTA needs to happen also in ATP and especially GS events
We need low ranked players to upset the top4, it makes it more interesting to watch.
What's the point if 90% of GS and MS1000 semi finals are always involving the top4? It's less interesting to watch...

Flash O'Groove
06-04-2012, 12:45 AM
What's happening in the WTA needs to happen also in ATP and especially GS events
We need low ranked players to upset the top4, it makes it more interesting to watch.
What's the point if 90% of GS and MS1000 semi finals are always involving the top4? It's less interesting to watch...

Agree. Yesterday match between Fed - Goffin and Djokovic - Seppi where interesting match because at some points it was possible that the favorite could lose in an upset. (until the head of the 2nd set for fed, until the end for Djokovic)

I agree they currently make somewhat sense but that they do is just a coincidence. Ever since the new ranking system came out it is a crapshoot to whether the rankings will make any sense or not as last years rankings and many other instances prove, so the WTA rankings are still meaningless until they change it to a more justified and respected ranking system (eg- the 90s divisor system).
That isnt just my opinion, many others have said the same thing, including former WTA champions.

Could you please explain the difference between the two system?

soyizgood
06-04-2012, 08:36 AM
For the 3000898908979th time, there is no major difference between the ATP and WTA points system. Even implementing the ATP points system would still have resulted in Wozniacki being the #1 player in 2010 and #2 in 2011.

ATP
4 majors (2000 pts)
7 MS 1000 (Monte Carlo optional and its points count among the MS 500 results)
MS 500 (3 of them must count)
MS 250
Up to 17 results count?

WTA
4 majors (2000 pts)
4 Premier Mandatory (1000 pts)
5 Premier 5 (900 pts, best 2 results count, events skipped have to be played the following year)
2 Premier 700
Premier 470
International 280 (prior year top 10 players limited to playing 2 of these events)
Up to 16 results count?

It's been a combination of inconsistency, complacency, and injuries at the top. No system can account for that and a divisor system would just reward certain players and punish up-starts, just like Nadal's preferred two-year points system. That and to prevent top players from just showing up at the big events and racking up the points that way, you'd have to require them to play certain number of lower level events. And players don't like being forced to play at places anymore than it is.

TERRASTAR18
06-04-2012, 08:43 AM
nope ... the whole WTA ***** right now is just ***** ... I tried watching Azarenka yesterday and she was screaming so much that I had to turn off my receiver. and the whole ranking system is just, whatever ... at least when it comes to guys you have Djoko, Fed and Rafa showing up at all major tournaments

with girls, it's like, if you are famous like Serena, Klijsters or Venus, you play whatever you like feel playing (mostly slams and few other tournaments, well, no wonder Wozniacki ended up being #1 for what, 2 years, without winning a major)... too many princesses.. hate what the WTA turned out to be :mad:

serena, clijsters and venus have played over 10 years so its reasonable they would have a shorter schedule.

Magnetite
06-04-2012, 09:47 AM
WTA is boring.

soyizgood
06-04-2012, 10:20 AM
WTA is boring.

And ATP is so fun when 3 of the 4 semifinal spots at majors are givens. I don't even watch ATP matches until the 4th round.