COVID rankings continue till August

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
what does this actually mean for Djokovic's number 1 ranking?
An asterisk must be added.

There's a reason why tennis historians/ex-players/coaches separate tennis stats between pre-open and open-era. Covid has also completely change the landscape of the sport.

Tennis stats between open-era and Covid-19 should be separated too.
 

Jai

Rookie
[
An asterisk must be added.

There's a reason why tennis historians/ex-players/coaches separate tennis stats between pre-open and open-era. Covid has also completely change the landscape of the sport.

Tennis stats between open-era and Covid-19 should be separated too.
What a convenient take. I guess you completely missed the part that even with a traditional 52 week ranking system, Novak would have still held the No.1 ranking for as long as he has. Look it up. You are entitled to choose whom to root for. Math doesn't care for your subjective opinion though.

It's ludicrous to bring in pre open era comparisons here. Once the tour resumed, all players were eligible to compete. Novak in fact lost 22 weeks from his tally when the tour was frozen. If there's any asterisking to be done, it's for those 22 weeks which should also be tallied separately under his name, with a notation that rankings were frozen for those weeks. No other asterisking needed whatsoever for any of the other weeks, your wishing he wasn't the one who broke the record doesn't conjure up an asterisk.
 

Jai

Rookie
Tell me one of this tennis historians/ex-players/coaches who advocate this.
He's not talking about historians/ex players in regards to the so-called asterisking. He's talking about people who can't bear that a record got broken. Apparently that emotion conjures up asterisks for free.
 
Last edited:

beard

Hall of Fame
Why the hell won't they just return 52 weeks ranking? Federer may be dropping out of ATP list without a single ranking point since he has not played over a year, but he would have protected ranking, so nevertheless he'd start tournaments as one of top 5 seeds or so. This is just insane.
That's not how protected rankings works...
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
[
What a convenient take. I guess you completely missed the part that even with a traditional 52 week ranking system, Novak would have still held the No.1 ranking for as long as he has. Look it up. You are entitled to choose whom to root for. Math doesn't care for your subjective opinion though.

It's ludicrous to bring in pre open era comparisons here. Once the tour resumed, all players were eligible to compete. Novak in fact lost 22 weeks from his tally when the tour was frozen. If there's any asterisking to be done, it's for those 22 weeks which should also be tallied separately under his name, with a notation that rankings were frozen for those weeks. No other asterisking needed whatsoever for any of the other weeks, your wishing he wasn't the one who broke the record doesn't conjure up an asterisk.
The depth is thinner and strength of the field is weaker during covid because many great players have withdrew tournaments(including slams) due to health/safety precaution and travel complication. There's no spectators, tournaments canceled, and many restrictions.

Until the pandemic is over for good, tennis and all sports will never be the same.
 

Jai

Rookie
The depth is thinner and strength of the field is weaker during covid because many great players have withdrew tournaments(including slams) due to health/safety precaution and travel complication. There's no spectators, tournaments canceled, and many restrictions.

Until the pandemic is over for good, tennis and all sports will never be the same.
Eligibility is open. Vaccines are becoming available. No one is barred from competing. Spectators not being in stands doesn't count towards any asterisk whatsoever. You don't want to accept the record is broken, plain and simple. The world is facing this covid crisis together, pity you should use that as an excuse to further your agenda. Not done.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Why the hell won't they just return 52 weeks ranking? Federer may be dropping out of ATP list without a single ranking point since he has not played over a year, but he would have protected ranking, so nevertheless he'd start tournaments as one of top 5 seeds or so. This is just insane.
.

"The Entry Protection shall be a position in the FedEx ATP Rankings, as determined by the player's average FedEx ATP Rankings position during the first three months of his injury. The Entry Protection shall be for entry into the main draw or qualifying competition or for special exempt consideration. The Entry Protection shall not be used for seeding purposes, Lucky Loser consideration or for entry into the Nitto ATP Finals."
 

Robert F

Professional
A step backwards if you ask me.
I think they should change the system to make it reflect current play and now you are taking results from 2 years ago?
Post COVID, I'd recommend a 52 week rolling ranking. But once points age past 6 months they are halved. So win Oz, get 2000 points in January. Once you hit July those points go to 1000 and then come January the following year zero. That way if someone had a good run at Oz, but tanked the rest of the season they don't get a top ten seed at the US Open.
I think we've seen that on the WTA too. Ostepenko was put high in a lot of draws after her win, only to fall quickly.
 

CYGS

Legend
An asterisk must be added.

There's a reason why tennis historians/ex-players/coaches separate tennis stats between pre-open and open-era. Covid has also completely change the landscape of the sport.

Tennis stats between open-era and Covid-19 should be separated too.
To Federer’s top 10 ranking.
 

AO13

New User
That's not how protected rankings works...
.

"The Entry Protection shall be a position in the FedEx ATP Rankings, as determined by the player's average FedEx ATP Rankings position during the first three months of his injury. The Entry Protection shall be for entry into the main draw or qualifying competition or for special exempt consideration. The Entry Protection shall not be used for seeding purposes, Lucky Loser consideration or for entry into the Nitto ATP Finals."
Oh, didn't know that. Thanks for the reply and info.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Must keep a certain someone in top 10 :sneaky:
Well I guess certain players won't be dropping down the rankings like a stone and will have a good (undeserved) seeding at the slams. Good for business. Not necessarily good for sport.
These dudes will do anything to protect Federer's Top 10 ranking! :oops:
Anything to keep Federer seeded at slams :whistle:
The truth is Djokovic has never needed these measures and has won enough to be #1, but Federer actually needs these to remain in top 10. Big difference.
rent free lol

At least it's good to see he's on your minds 24/7. I'd be worried for you guys when he retires.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Besides, with this terrible field, Fed could probably come back on crutches and still manage top 10. Our #3 ranked player just bombed out in straights in an ATP 500 to Lajovic lol. Street didn't do so hot either.
 
Last edited:

N01E

Professional
There's literally zero justification for this. Never was actually.
Well, I'm not a fan, but there is some reasoning to it. The first form of protected ranking was quite ok. Simply dropping points would make some events give much less points in the long run as they would reflect on the rankings for shorter amount of time. I was a fan of keeping them all at 52 weeks, as that would be the most "fair" way of doing it I believe, but that could lead to some confusing drop dates and points from different editions of same event (or some sort of solution like picking the better result of two years with some weights). At first WTF 2019 were to drop before the WTF 2020, but that's when they made the first change and kept them instead (don't have to say who benefited from that the most).

Now for the third (or second, depends how serious the WTF change is to you) version. If we look at 2019 events then (from the big ones) the one that would be worth the least until now was Canada, because rankings were frozen for 22 weeks, it would impact them for 30, so it was more like 600 in a way instead of a full 1k. However, simple tour resumpiton gave it all the missing weeks plus a bit extra and that's the one that was hurt the most. IW 2019 got like 50 weeks of 1k and now 52 of 500 which is insane. The only tournaments that would need that boost were the rescheduled ones (Kitzbühel, Hamburg, Rome & RG) from 2020 and maybe 50% makes sense for them but everything else is just a one big NOPE.

Besides, with this terrible field, Fed could probably come back on crutches and still manage top 10. Our #3 ranked player just bombed out in straights in an ATP 500 to Bublik lol. Street didn't do so hot either.
You mixed them up.
 

CYGS

Legend
Besides, with this terrible field, Fed could probably come back on crutches and still manage top 10. Our #3 ranked player just bombed out in straights in an ATP 500 to Lajovic lol. Street didn't do so hot either.
Should coulda woulda face the truth you bimbo
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
I would have just kept the points of the tournaments that haven't been held, until the next edition.

For example Djokovic keeps 2000 points until the next Wimbledon. Thiem keeps his 1000 points until the next Indian Wells.
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
For example Djokovic keeps 2000 points until the next Wimbledon. Thiem keeps his 1000 points until the next Indian Wells.
Yes.

Looking at the ATP calendar, really only IW is delayed. The tour could have just resumed normally starting Miami, without any further problem ensuing.

And then IW points drop on the week the tournament is being held.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Besides, with this terrible field, Fed could probably come back on crutches and still manage top 10. Our #3 ranked player just bombed out in straights in an ATP 500 to Lajovic lol. Street didn't do so hot either.
Well if he could, he could do it the same way all the other players have done it.
 
Well, I'm not a fan, but there is some reasoning to it. The first form of protected ranking was quite ok.
From the moment the tour resumed in whatever form, protected points didn't make sense, at least for tournaments that were played. Keeping those points protected, it incentivized the players to NOT continue playing or gave them excuse to skip one tournament because of "covid" but not another one (Nadal USO-FO conundrum). Basically, ATP sabotaged the tennis tour.
 

Sudacafan

Talk Tennis Guru
When I read about covid rankings in the thread title, I thought those were to rate the seriousness of such infections among the tennis pros who caught it.
Maybe Dimitrov would have been at the top, I don’t have many details about the rest who tested positive.
Apart from ATP Player Patient Zero, Dimitrov, I recall:
Djokovic, Nishikori, Steve Johnson, A. Zverev, Paire... who else?
 

weakera

G.O.A.T.
I would have just kept the points of the tournaments that haven't been held, until the next edition.

For example Djokovic keeps 2000 points until the next Wimbledon. Thiem keeps his 1000 points until the next Indian Wells.
That would be the most sensible solution by far.
 
Top