ATP tennis seeding is prejudice

[Federiffic]

If you look at chess they use ELO rating more based on performance against other players, if you beat higher ranked player you get more points this is how tennis should be not more points for quantity of tournaments against lesser players, but quality of play.

 

[Fee]

I said before keep old rankings until AO then use only the tournaments that took place in that year...anyway it's ok how it is, it's not like top seeds don't make it to the higher phases so it works anyway.

But not eveyone plays warmup tournaments before the AO, so some players would have 1 event, some 2 and some 3. How would that be more fair?

The reason tennis uses the 52 week rolling system is because over the years they have determined that it is the most fair.

 

[sureshs]

Show me company who pays young inexperienced worker more than
top experienced worker and I show you company that won't be around long.

I cannot show you such an American company because they have already fired the experienced worker so comparison is not possible.

 

[All-rounder]

Federer was penalized points for not playing enough 500 events, is this fair?

Should seeding system be more about quantity or quality of play?

It's a mix of both really. You forget that Federer has the ability to play whatever tournament he wants. So that means it's up to him to schedule where he plays and not play it's that simple.

 

[Fee]

Federer was penalized points for not playing enough 500 events, is this fair?

Should seeding system be more about quantity or quality of play?

Yes it is fair that he was penalized, because other players were penalized too. 18 events in 10 months is not asking a lot of these players, especially considering that lower ranked players usually play up to 30 tournaments a year to get their best results.

The seeding system rewards quality of play, the farther you get in a tournament, the more points you earn. If you play high quality tennis, you only need to play 18 events.

Funny, you never seemed concerned about this issue before Fed dropped to #3, so let's not pretend that you want this reasoning to apply to any player other than him. Seeding him #1 would not have prevented any of the losses he's had this year, people other than Nadal have beaten him.

 

[JayChu]

Federer was penalized points for not playing enough 500 events, is this fair?

Fed chose his schedule, so it is his fault for not following the rules correctly.

Should he be offered some special exemption because he is the almighty Fed who won 16 slams? No

Did he deserve to get penalized? Yes, because he didn't follow the rules and all of the other players are.

 

[JayChu]

I seriously rank this thread as one of the most epic fail threads ever.