Question regarding ATP London Finals

[kingduo]

Since Fed won a Grand Slam, does he immediately qualify for the ATP Finals in London? or he still needs to work on more points to earn a spot. Thanks

 

[Chanwan]

If he is ranked within the top-15 and there's not another one above him in the rankings - but outside of the top-8 - with a slam, then yes.
edit: this is from memory, the below might be more accurate

 

[NBP]

He's qualified basically. If he didn't finished top 8, then he would qualify because any slam champion ranked 8-20 qualifies. And seeing as he has 2000 points, he's guaranteed to finish top 18 (if he didn't play another event all year).

 

[kingduo]

He's qualified basically. If he didn't finished top 8, then he would qualify because any slam champion ranked 8-20 qualifies. And seeing as he has 2000 points, he's guaranteed to finish top 18 (if he didn't play another event all year).

Thanks!

 

[Chicharito]

He's qualified basically. If he didn't finished top 8, then he would qualify because any slam champion ranked 8-20 qualifies. And seeing as he has 2000 points, he's guaranteed to finish top 18 (if he didn't play another event all year).

Yeah, only issue would be if someone else won a Grand slam but didn't finish top 8. As the above rule only applies to one player.

So say Cilic wins a slam and comes 9th, with Federer in 10th then Fed would not qualify.

 

[ArcspacE]

Since Fed won a Grand Slam, does he immediately qualify for the ATP Finals in London? or he still needs to work on more points to earn a spot. Thanks

Unless he falls outside the Top 20 - yes

 

[Kalin]

Yeah, only issue would be if someone else won a Grand slam but didn't finish top 8. As the above rule only applies to one player.

So say Cilic wins a slam and comes 9th, with Federer in 10th then Fed would not qualify.

I'd be worried about Berdych!

 

[Deleted member 743561]

Yeah, only issue would be if someone else won a Grand slam but didn't finish top 8. As the above rule only applies to one player.

So say Cilic wins a slam and comes 9th, with Federer in 10th then Fed would not qualify.

How odd would it be if every major winner finished outside the top eight.

 

[Inanimate_object]

How odd would it be if every major winner finished outside the top eight.

I'm almost certain that's mathematically impossible. I can't see how 4 separate players each bank 2000 points and yet there are still enough points left on tour for at least 8 other players to earn more than 2000.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

I'm almost certain that's mathematically impossible. I can't see how 4 separate players each bank 2000 points and yet there are still enough points left on tour for at least 8 other players to earn more than 2000.

Remember, runners-up get 1,200 points, and then there are lesser points for the other top finishers. It's not winner-take-all.

That said, I do not know how many points are on offer over the course of the tour's year.

 

[Sysyphus]

I'm almost certain that's mathematically impossible. I can't see how 4 separate players each bank 2000 points and yet there are still enough points left on tour for at least 8 other players to earn more than 2000.

Definitely possible on paper: as of this moment there are 13 non-major winners with over 2000 points, and three of the slam winners would still have way above 2000 without the points from their major as well. Lot of points to be made for those who make it to the quarters and beyond in most majors/masters and who do well at the 500 and 250 level.

It would never actually happen of course.

 

[BGod]

Essentially qualifies yes. But it only applies to one player outside Top 8.

And yes, it's basically impossible for even two Slam Champions to be outside the Top 8. At the end of 1996, Becker was 6th and Krajicek was 7th while Kafelnikov was 3rd. That's the worst you're gonna get collectively.

 

[underground]

Essentially qualifies yes. But it only applies to one player outside Top 8.

And yes, it's basically impossible for even two Slam Champions to be outside the Top 8. At the end of 1996, Becker was 6th and Krajicek was 7th while Kafelnikov was 3rd. That's the worst you're gonna get collectively.

It technically is mathematically possible for all slam champions to be outside the top 8:

If 4 different slam champions don't play a single event outside the slam they won: 2000 points each

2 different slam finalists with 2 500-event wins each - 2200 points each
the other 2 different slam finalists with 1 masters win each - 2200 points each
4 guys winning 2 masters each and losing in the first round in 1 slam - 2010 points each

Also you can do a Raonic and reach the SF of every slam and masters 1000 but not winning any titles, will give 6120 points LOL.

 

[BGod]

It technically is mathematically possible for all slam champions to be outside the top 8:

If 4 different slam champions don't play a single event outside the slam they won: 2000 points each

2 different slam finalists with 2 500-event wins each - 2200 points each
the other 2 different slam finalists with 1 masters win each - 2200 points each
4 guys winning 2 masters each and losing in the first round in 1 slam - 2010 points each

Also you can do a Raonic and reach the SF of every slam and masters 1000 but not winning any titles, will give 6120 points LOL.

We're not talking about fantasy though. Gaudio is the last Slam champion to qualify outside Top 8. Although Cilic finished #9 in his Slam season, he had qualified beforehand and thus skipped two tournaments that likely would have gotten him the points (Nadal withdrew as #3). Two Slam Champions have never finished outside the Top 8 in the same season. You're talking about all 4.