Djokovic is basically guaranteed to end 2020 as #1

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Not saying that. I'm saying they're close.
???

Would you have rather crowned a #1 based off half a year of results? We don't know who would have won Wimbledon last year or would have won the USO had Nadal decided to play.
That is an argument for not awarding a YE#1, not for resorting to favouring results from the last year.

It's best to count the results from the previous year so we get some inkling as to who could have won Wimbledon, and don't punish players for deciding to withdraw for their health.
No.

Imagine if we didn't have the 2nd half of this year. Your argument would be "Djokovic won AO and ATP Cup, so he deserves a full YE#1". This would be untrue, that's not a year of accomplishments. At least with the current system we're counting over 12 months worth of accomplishments.
My argument would have never been that. Interesting how you decided to make such a ridiculous statement. In that scenario it would have been even clearer how absurd is to award a YE#1 based only on part of the year.

With the "current" solution the results from the last year gain the main importance, which, considering that they are known, are simple favouring of certain players at the expense of everyone else. I though that the supporters of the player that pretends to fight for the "little man" on the tour would be more understanding, but apparently that is only when his own interests are not questioned.

It is in effect the two year ranking system proposed by Nadal. Back then the same fanbase that now says it is OK to use such system, was ridiculing Nadal's proposal. How times change!

:cool:
 
Last edited:

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Notice how he also said “and win as many slams as possible” instead of “get the slam record”. It’s because he knows that it’s going to be very hard to win 4 more to get #21 ahead of Federer, and also with Nadal ahead and with the FO coming up.
I think he meant the opposite. He wants to get as big a lead in the Slam race as possible. Not that I say that he will or want him to do so, but I’m sure that’s what he meant to say. He doesn't want to stop AFTER overtaking.
 

socallefty

Professional
If Thiem wins the French Open while Djokovic does not make the semifinals, makes the semis of the Paris Masters and wins the WTF finals, can’t he overtake Djokovic especially if Novak does not qualify for the WTF semifinals? This seems like a scenario that could happen if Thiem feels that this is his year after the USO victory.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
If Thiem wins the French Open while Djokovic does not make the semifinals, makes the semis of the Paris Masters and wins the WTF finals, can’t he overtake Djokovic especially if Novak does not qualify for the WTF semifinals? This seems like a scenario that could happen if Thiem feels that this is his year after the USO victory.
To put into perspective what handicap we are talking about here: Thiem should win 2/3 biggest events in tennis, then wins the next in significance, plus makes the SF of Paris, all the while his next biggest competitor wins one Major, 2 M1000 and doesn't make it past the SF of any other big tournament.

:cool:
 

TripleATeam

Legend
That is an argument for not awarding a YE#1, not for resorting to favouring results from the last year.
Ah yes, ignore Djokovic's AO victory, ATP Cup victory, etc.
Oop, fair point. My mistake, your argumentative skills have no equal.
My argument would have never been that. Interesting how you decided to make such a ridiculous statement. In that scenario it would have been even clearer how absurd is to award a YE#1 based only on part of the year.

With the "current" solution the results from the last year gain the main importance, which, considering that they are known, are simple favouring of certain players at the expense of everyone else. I though that the supporters of the player that pretends to fight for the "little man" on the tour would be more understanding, but apparently that is only when his own interests are not questioned.

It is in effect the two year ranking system proposed by Nadal. Back then the same fanbase that now says it is OK to use such system, was ridiculing Nadal's proposal. How times change!

:cool:
It's the argument I was rebutting regarding Thiem and this year (Thiem would have deserved it if he won RG, Djokovic would not). I assumed you supported that argument. If not then we have nothing to discuss.

Also wrong. The ATP made a decision that most accurately counted an entire year of full-participation tournaments. It causes less mobility in the rankings, but keeps the rankings from becoming so volatile they are useless. Go ahead and talk ill of Djokovic if you'd like, but saying that this system is unfair to Thiem of all people is ridiculous, as he keeps the points from his IW win, Madrid SF, and was able to improve on his dismal failures in 2019 - Cincinnati absence, USO and Rome opening loss, and Paris R3.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Ah yes, ignore Djokovic's AO victory, ATP Cup victory, etc.

Oop, fair point. My mistake, your argumentative skills have no equal.

It's the argument I was rebutting regarding Thiem and this year (Thiem would have deserved it if he won RG, Djokovic would not). I assumed you supported that argument. If not then we have nothing to discuss.

Also wrong. The ATP made a decision that most accurately counted an entire year of full-participation tournaments. It causes less mobility in the rankings, but keeps the rankings from becoming so volatile they are useless. Go ahead and talk ill of Djokovic if you'd like, but saying that this system is unfair to Thiem of all people is ridiculous, as he keeps the points from his IW win, Madrid SF, and was able to improve on his dismal failures in 2019 - Cincinnati absence, USO and Rome opening loss, and Paris R3.
Ah, yes, change the conditions for awarding the YE#1 based on a precedent.

Yep, just like yours, just more precise.

Bolded: it is unclear to me what you are addressing.

Bolded 2: the "year of participation" - cannot double count points for one tournament and claim that it is "a year".

"Keeps the rankings so volatile, that they are useless" - no they are not. You just keep them based on the ATP live race. Far from "useless", but "useless" to anyone who is a Djokovic fan. The rankings would serve their purpose very well. This system is unfair to everyone, but the top player who gets to keep his advantage over everyone else. You harping about Thiem having the advantage because of keeping results only confirms my point. The difference is that Djokovic is even bigger benefactor from that situation. Thanks for admitting it so eloquently, though!

:cool:
 

N01E

Professional
Yeah, because of the ATP protecting his points from 2019, he's basically a lock to end 2020 as #1, even if he loses in the first round at RG and Thiem wins the whole thing. Thiem would then be #2 at best--maybe even #3--with win-win-final that he wasn't far from winning at the only three slams contested this year, which would be hilarious (in a very bad way, of course).

But hey, the most important thing is to make the record chase thrilling, isn't? Who cares about anyone winning and being #1 if they're not part of the 'Big 3'? :rolleyes:
The ATP protection just saved Nadal 2820 points... Right now it can save Novak 1720 points (1900 with USO) AT BEST. Do the math instead of random theories full of what ifs.
 

TripleATeam

Legend
Ah, yes, change the conditions for awarding the YE#1 based on a precedent.

Yep, just like yours, just more precise.

Bolded: it is unclear to me what you are addressing.

Bolded 2: the "year of participation" - cannot double count points for one tournament and claim that it is "a year".

"Keeps the rankings so volatile, that they are useless" - no they are not. You just keep them based on the ATP live race. Far from "useless", but "useless" to anyone who is a Djokovic fan. The rankings would serve their purpose very well. This system is unfair to everyone, but the top player who gets to keep his advantage over everyone else. You harping about Thiem having the advantage because of keeping results only confirms my point. The difference is that Djokovic is even bigger benefactor from that situation. Thanks for admitting it so eloquently, though!

:cool:
Are you dense? I didn't confirm your point at all and you claim my rebuttal supports your point.

Don't mind if I use your argument for a bit:
The system is unfair to players who had mediocre results throughout, but the highest ranked player with early upsets and late stage wins gets to keep his advantage over everyone else! You harping about Djokovic having the advantage because of keeping results only confirms my point. The difference is that Thiem is even bigger benefactor from that situation. Thanks for admitting it so eloquently, though!

Anyhow, let's get back to real talk. Base them on the live race? So going into Cincinnati and the US Open, Tennys Sandgren should be seeded above Denis Shapovalov in your rankings? That's ridiculous. I would understand your argument better if you said the results in the last 52 weeks (at least that would make sense), but this is senseless.

You do remember when they made that decision, right? Tennis was starting up again, but no tournament was for certain. It was entirely possible that the 2nd half of the year would not have been played, or even that a tournament would continue in a country that closed its borders to travel. Imagine if only US players played in the US Open, then you used that to determine seeding for Rome. The only way to keep some kind of sanity into 2021 was to include 2019 results.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Are you dense? I didn't confirm your point at all and you claim my rebuttal supports your point.

Don't mind if I use your argument for a bit:
The system is unfair to players who had mediocre results throughout, but the highest ranked player with early upsets and late stage wins gets to keep his advantage over everyone else! You harping about Djokovic having the advantage because of keeping results only confirms my point. The difference is that Thiem is even bigger benefactor from that situation. Thanks for admitting it so eloquently, though!

Anyhow, let's get back to real talk. Base them on the live race? So going into Cincinnati and the US Open, Tennys Sandgren should be seeded above Denis Shapovalov in your rankings? That's ridiculous. I would understand your argument better if you said the results in the last 52 weeks (at least that would make sense), but this is senseless.

You do remember when they made that decision, right? Tennis was starting up again, but no tournament was for certain. It was entirely possible that the 2nd half of the year would not have been played, or even that a tournament would continue in a country that closed its borders to travel. Imagine if only US players played in the US Open, then you used that to determine seeding for Rome. The only way to keep some kind of sanity into 2021 was to include 2019 results.
It does support my claim. What you say about Thiem is applicable to Djokovic, only to a bigger extent! You didn't say how it affects Djokovic. Curious omission, if I didn't know why you did it.

Did Sandgren win unfairly his matches, so that it is unfathomable that he is placed over Shapovalov? Curious. I think it is more unfair to Sandgren, if his good more recent results are thumped by the stacking of points from more than one year (or double counting).

Bolded: hypothetical scenarios that don't make sense to make a "logical" point. Why would you imply that USA will close its borders for tennis players, but Italy won't do the same? Oh, it is just one of those made up constructs, that serve to make a point, without making any sense whatsoever.

:cool:
 

N01E

Professional
If Thiem wins the French Open while Djokovic does not make the semifinals, makes the semis of the Paris Masters and wins the WTF finals, can’t he overtake Djokovic especially if Novak does not qualify for the WTF semifinals? This seems like a scenario that could happen if Thiem feels that this is his year after the USO victory.
Whether Djokovic makes the semis in RG is irrelevant, he only gets more points if he makes the final. And it's not "especially" if Novak does not qualify for the semis, it's his only chance. (excluding potential 500s). An undefeated WTF run (WITH RG win and Bercy semi) would mean Thiem gets a total of 10,895. If Djokovic loses EVERY WTF match he playes he'll be sitting at 11,060. Dominic would need a Paris final in that scenario to take the lead, which would put him at 11,135 and it would require Novak to lose at least 2 WTF matches.
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
The race for 2020:
1. Djokovic 5,165
2. Thiem 3,365
.
.
5. Nadal 1,290

Djokovic leading even without 2019 points. Seems fair to me.
At the moment, it is totally fair. I was just talking about an hypothetical scenario in which Thiem could win RG and Djokovic could do badly there, and he could still end up the year as #1 (besides, seems like it isn't decided yet whether they'll keep the 2019 points to determine the 2020 end rankings, which would be a sham, tbh).
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
It was a culmination of 2 things

1) Murray having a poor 2nd half in 2015. Djokovic having almost an impeccable 2nd half in 2015
2) Djokovic going off the rails post French Open, and Murray going on a rampage in the second half of 2016

Djokovic couldn't defend his large volume of previous year points added to Murray having a near flawless second half sealed the deal
Seems like you do not understand the way rankings work. How Murray fared in 2015 didn't help him at all in reaching the #1 spot at the end of 2016. The only thing that did is that he outperformed eveyone, point-wise, in 2016. Simple. 2015 doesn't enter into the equation, nor do 2014 or 2017 (and nor shoud they).

This year is very different, though, as they're also counting the 2019 results, which is just ridiculous.

The ATP protection just saved Nadal 2820 points... Right now it can save Novak 1720 points (1900 with USO) AT BEST. Do the math instead of random theories full of what ifs.
What are you smoking, seriously? Wimbledon alone is 2,000 points. Add Madrid and Paris Bercy, and you're already at 4,000. Is that it? Nope. Semi at RG, 720 more points. Shanghai, Monte Carlo, Miami, and Indian Wells? A total of 495 more points to the goods. And let's not forget Tokyo, shall we?

I didn't check Nadal's total, and it's quite possible that this system protected 2,820 points for him (nah, that can't be--it's more, as RG + Rome alone are 3,000 points). But this saves a whopping 5,775 points for Djokovic (ie more than he scored in 2020, a year in which he only lost one single match). If this doesn't seem ridiculous to you, I don't know what will.
 
Last edited:

beard

Hall of Fame
Seems like you do not understand the way rankings work. How Murray fared in 2015 didn't help him at all in reaching the #1 spot at the end of 2016. The only thing that did is that he outperformed eveyone, point-wise, in 2016. Simple. 2015 doesn't enter into the equation, nor do 2014 or 2017 (and nor shoud they).

This year is very different, though, as they're also counting the 2019 results, which is just ridiculous.



What are you smoking, seriously? Wimbledon alone is 2,000 points. Add Madrid and Paris Bercy, and you're already at 4,000. Is that it? Nope. Semi at RG, 720 more points. Shanghai, Monte Carlo, Miami, and Indian Wells? A total of 495 more points to the goods. And let's not forget Tokyo, shall we?

I didn't check Nadal's total, and it's quite possible that this system protected 2,820 points for him (nah, that can't be--it's more, as RG + Rome alone are 3,000 points). But this saves a whopping 5,775 points for Djokovic (ie more than he scored in 2020, a year in which he only lost one single match). If this doesn't seem ridiculous to you, I don't know what will.
System saved more points to Nadal than to Djokovic:


Garanted point from last year (haven't count 500, can't bother...):

Nadal: 7800
USO 2000
FO 2000
W 720
Canada 1000
Rome 1000
Madrid 360
MC 360
IW 360

Djokovic: 6220
USO 180
FO 720
W 2000
Rome 600
Cinc 360
Madrid 1000
Shanghai 180
Paris 1000
MC 180
IW 45
MIA 90
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Stating that "no system is perfect" is a blanket statement to cover for who benefits the most, which is entirely based on previous year's results, and that is hindsight on which the things are already predetermined (that Djokovic stands to benefit the most).

:cool:
Djokovic would still be comfortably ahead at #1 right now if we considered only 2020 points, or if we dropped off 2019 points for tournaments without a replacement (includes FO):

Djokovic's lead at #1 is actually less comfortable than it would have been otherwise.

OfficialOnly 2020 pointsDropping off 2019 pointsFree points
Djokovic11260516570454215
Nadal9850 (-1410)129020507800
Thiem91253365 (-1800)5435 (-1610)3690
Federer663072018004830
Medvedev5890138023903500
Tsitsipas5175122032401935
Zverev4650197532451405

(dropping off 2019: how the points would be if the regular point drop off schedule were used; free points: how many points this provisional ranking system gifted each player)

The table clearly shows Federer and Nadal are the ones who have benefitted the most from this. Rafa in particular since he's done f*** all in 2020 but is still #2. Federer will also be allowed to hang on to a Top 4-ish spot at the end of the year even though he's played one actual tournament. Folks like @PeoplesChamp should count their blessings instead of whining about it
 
Last edited:

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
System saved more points to Nadal than to Djokovic:


Garanted point from last year (haven't count 500, can't bother...):

Nadal: 7800
USO 2000
FO 2000
W 720
Canada 1000
Rome 1000
Madrid 360
MC 360
IW 360

Djokovic: 6220
USO 180
FO 720
W 2000
Rome 600
Cinc 360
Madrid 1000
Shanghai 180
Paris 1000
MC 180
IW 45
MIA 90
Thanks for this. I never said Djokovic fared better than Nadal, btw (he was a huge beneficiary as well, ie even more so than Djokovic, as you just demonstrated). But an "up-and-coming" (so to speak) player like Thiem is royally screwed compared to them. They are basically guaranteed to keep the #1 and #2 spots for the foreseeable future, whatever their results (just as Federer is guaranteed to not drop in the rankings despite his not playing--although I suppose that, in his case, you could make an argument about his injury, as other injured players have had their ranking protected in the past, too).

I understand that the ATP had to do something about the tournaments that couldn't be played. But counting some tournaments twice so players can choose whether to play them or not? That is moronic, imho (ie Nadal should have lost 2,000 points from the USO, and the RG points from 2019 should drop at the end of the tournament, even if it takes place in September/October).
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Thanks for this. I never said Djokovic fared better than Nadal, btw (he was a huge beneficiary as well, ie even more so than Djokovic, as you just demonstrated). But an "up-and-coming" (so to speak) player like Thiem is royally screwed compared to them. They are basically guaranteed to keep the #1 and #2 spots for the foreseeable future, whatever their results (just as Federer is guaranteed to not drop in the rankings despite his not playing--although I suppose that, in his case, you could make an argument about his injury, as other injured players have had their ranking protected in the past, too).
The protected ranking for injuries never applied to the actual rankings; it would only allow players to enter tournaments. But their actual ranking would drop like a brick if they didn't play (e.g: Murray). Fed got lucky.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
The race for 2020:
1. Djokovic 5,165
2. Thiem 3,365
.
.
5. Nadal 1,290

Djokovic leading even without 2019 points. Seems fair to me.
Thiem is so close only because of the DQ.

This is an interesting time when folks who endlessly trivalized ATP1000s make a 180 degree turn to complain that a season is not worth a season if several ATP1000s are not played.
Also funny is not a single Olympic gold medal worshiper even mentioned the cancelled summer Olympics....
 

Devtennis01

Professional
I have no issue with it. Would have happened with or without the current situation.
Highly expect him to repeat in 2021. Just about to hang onto it in 2022. Then, finally relinquish in 2023 to Zverev.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Thanks for this. I never said Djokovic fared better than Nadal, btw (he was a huge beneficiary as well, ie even more so than Djokovic, as you just demonstrated). But an "up-and-coming" (so to speak) player like Thiem is royally screwed compared to them. They are basically guaranteed to keep the #1 and #2 spots for the foreseeable future, whatever their results (just as Federer is guaranteed to not drop in the rankings despite his not playing--although I suppose that, in his case, you could make an argument about his injury, as other injured players have had their ranking protected in the past, too).

I understand that the ATP had to do something about the tournaments that couldn't be played. But counting some tournaments twice so players can choose whether to play them or not? That is moronic, imho (ie Nadal should have lost 2,000 points from the USO, and the RG points from 2019 should drop at the end of the tournament, even if it takes place in September/October).
Nadal is without a doubt the biggest beneficiary of this system. He is still ranked #2 (which for draw purposes is the same as #1) even though his best result this year is winning Acapulco. Federer will also hang on to a Top 4 spot or so despite playing one single tournament all year (and was going to be out because of injury anyway)

Djokovic won every tournament he's played in except for the USO so he is the rightful #1 regardless. The only thing that could put it in question is Thiem winning RG while Djokovic bounces out in the first week
 
Last edited:

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Djokovic would still be comfortably ahead at #1 right now if we considered only 2020 points, or if we dropped off 2019 points for tournaments without a replacement (includes FO):

Djokovic's lead at #1 is actually less comfortable than it would have been otherwise.

OfficialOnly 2020 pointsDropping off 2019 pointsFree points
Djokovic11260516570454215
Nadal9850 (-1410)129020507800
Thiem91253365 (-1800)5435 (-1610)3690
Federer663072018004830
Medvedev5890138023903500
Tsitsipas5175122032401935
Zverev4650197532451405

(dropping off 2019: how the points would be if the regular point drop off schedule were used; free points: how many points this provisional ranking system gifted each player)

The table clearly shows Federer and Nadal are the ones who have benefitted the most from this. Rafa in particular since he's done f*** all in 2020 but is still #2. Federer will also be allowed to hang on to a Top 4-ish spot at the end of the year even though he's played one actual tournament. Folks like @PeoplesChamp should count their blessings instead of whining about it
What is most telling is (free points/2020 points) ratio:
Federer 6.7 times
Nadal 6.0
Med 2.5
Tsitsipas 1.6
Thiem 1.1
Novak 0.8
Zverev 0.7
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
If Thiem wins the French Open while Djokovic does not make the semifinals, makes the semis of the Paris Masters and wins the WTF finals, can’t he overtake Djokovic especially if Novak does not qualify for the WTF semifinals? This seems like a scenario that could happen if Thiem feels that this is his year after the USO victory.
Thiem at the age of 27 has not won a single big title on clay. Still him winning RG "could happen".

AND you need Novak, who has won all 31 completed matches in 2020 to suddenly not reach semis?
 

Biotic

Rookie
Stating that "no system is perfect" is a blanket statement to cover for who benefits the most, which is entirely based on previous year's results, and that is hindsight on which the things are already predetermined (that Djokovic stands to benefit the most).
:cool:
100% of your tennis justice warrior rant and concern for the future of tennis here is a blanket to cover your hatred for what looks like the imminent downfall of Federer's most important records in the coming years. Whoever benefited the most from covid related changes, it is not the guy who was robbed of the chance to defend Wimbledon title and quite possibly get 20+ more weeks at no.1. You've been given false hope with covid tho, it is fine to be upset.
 

itrium84

Professional
2020 is a short season due to COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns. Tennis in the "bubble" with no spectators and depleted field is never the same.

It doesn't make any sense to hand out the YE #1 at the end of this year.
Players are stupid for even bothering to play any events, since it's 2020 and any achievement made this year doesn't really count. This year, there's no no1, because all players are on the same identical level, instead of no1 award we should give participation trophies to all of them. It's simply impossible to become more successful than other players this year, winning is exactly the same as losing, nothing matters until 2021.
 

itrium84

Professional
To put into perspective what handicap we are talking about here: Thiem should win 2/3 biggest events in tennis, then wins the next in significance, plus makes the SF of Paris, all the while his next biggest competitor wins one Major, 2 M1000 and doesn't make it past the SF of any other big tournament.

:cool:
Thiem has won 1800 less atp points than Novak this year. If he still falls behind Novak in atp race points even after YEC, would you still call it unfair?
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Thiem has won 1800 less atp points than Novak this year. If he still falls behind Novak in atp race points even after YEC, would you still call it unfair?
There is a tennis calendar, which has not been in effect. Thiem had to sacrifice the Rome Masters after winning USO in order to be fit for RG. Such anomalies only illustrate the inadequacy of looking for a YE #1 this year. No, I won't call it unfair. Points earned by playing cannot be "unfair".

:cool:
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Djokovic would still be comfortably ahead at #1 right now if we considered only 2020 points, or if we dropped off 2019 points for tournaments without a replacement (includes FO):

Djokovic's lead at #1 is actually less comfortable than it would have been otherwise.

OfficialOnly 2020 pointsDropping off 2019 pointsFree points
Djokovic11260516570454215
Nadal9850 (-1410)129020507800
Thiem91253365 (-1800)5435 (-1610)3690
Federer663072018004830
Medvedev5890138023903500
Tsitsipas5175122032401935
Zverev4650197532451405

(dropping off 2019: how the points would be if the regular point drop off schedule were used; free points: how many points this provisional ranking system gifted each player)

The table clearly shows Federer and Nadal are the ones who have benefitted the most from this. Rafa in particular since he's done f*** all in 2020 but is still #2. Federer will also be allowed to hang on to a Top 4-ish spot at the end of the year even though he's played one actual tournament. Folks like @PeoplesChamp should count their blessings instead of whining about it
Federer is not even playing. Just hilarious.

Also, considering that currently the main threat to Djokovic is Thiem, not Nadal, it is not less, but more comfortable, especially considering that the reason why Thiem is behind Djokovic by that much is ... inability to recover from a win in a Major.

Nice try at bureaucracy while ignoring the reality.

:cool:
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Federer is not even playing. Just hilarious.
That is exactly the problem. Federer is going to enjoy his little vacation and come back on tour with his ranking basically intact

Also, considering that currently the main threat to Djokovic is Thiem, not Nadal, it is not less, but more comfortable, especially considering that the reason why Thiem is behind Djokovic by that much is ... inability to recover from a win in a Major.
Thiem would have been 1610 points behind Djokovic even if their 2019 points dropped, versus the real difference of 2135 points. Djokovic only "gained" 525 points on Thiem thanks to this.

Thiem also stands to gain from this, seeing how he is going to keep his 1200 RG F points despite the likely event of him losing in the SF this year. That's 480 points saved by the system. If Djokovic also manages to defend his SF points, then it's basically a wash for Djokovic and Thiem on the year.
 
Last edited:

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
That is exactly the problem. Federer is going to enjoy his little vacation and come back on tour with his ranking basically intact
Little vacation? He went under the knife and I am pretty sure that he could have had protected ranking, if there was no such a decision in place.

Thiem would have been 1610 points behind Djokovic even if their 2019 points dropped, versus the real difference of 2135 points. Djokovic only "gained" 525 points on Thiem thanks to this.
Ah, yes, "only".

Thiem also stands to gain from this, seeing how he is going to keep his 1200 RG F points despite the likely event of him losing in the SF this year. That's 480 points saved by the system. If Djokovic also manages to defend his SF points, then it's basically a wash for Djokovic and Thiem on the year.
Awwwwwww. No, there is no fanboyism whatsoever here.

Anyway, I don't think that you managed more than to prove my point.

:cool:
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Little vacation? He went under the knife and I am pretty sure that he could have had protected ranking, if there was no such a decision in place.
The protected ranking does not prevent your actual points from dropping. It's only used to determine entry into tournaments. But now Fed will be seeded in the Top 4 and enjoy the benefits of this, including his easier draws and first round byes

Ah, yes, "only".
525 pts isn't that significant when the gap between them is much bigger than 525.

Thiem could have been closer to Djokovic had he not been destroyed 2 and 1 by Krajinovic in the first round of Cincy, and then skipped Rome. Those two tournaments gave Novak 2000 points, matching Thiem's USO title. But this has nothing to do with the new rankings

Awwwwwww. No, there is no fanboyism whatsoever here.
Thiem has been comprehensively beaten by Nadal at RG every time they played. What makes you think this will be any different?
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
A protected ranking wouldn't have given him the seeding privileges that his actual ranking will
It will give him the only thing that matters really.It is hilarious to what lengths you are going with this. Federer is not a benefactor in the current situation, and looking at his situation he is the perfect candidate fro applying for a protected ranking in normal circumstances.


525 pts isn't that significant when the gap between them is much bigger than 525.
LOL

Thiem could have been closer to Djokovic had he not been destroyed 2 and 1 by Krajinovic in the first round of Cincy, and then skipped Rome. Those two tournaments gave Novak 2000 points, matching Thiem's USO title. But this has nothing to do with the new rankings
Ah, yes, let's punish Thiem, for the crazy schedule that is harming him in the first place. Unsurprising.


Thiem has been comprehensively beaten by Nadal at RG every time they played. What makes you think this will be any different?
Oh, dear, and you call yourself a tennis fan? More like a fan of personal compensation via tennis.

:cool:
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
It will give him the only thing that matters really.It is hilarious to what lengths you are going with this. Federer is not a benefactor in the current situation, and looking at his situation he is the perfect candidate fro applying for a protected ranking in normal circumstances.
The protected ranking does not prevent your actual points from dropping. It's only used to determine entry into tournaments. But now Fed will be seeded in the Top 4 and enjoy the benefits of this, including his easier draws and first round byes

This makes a significant difference

Oh, dear, and you call yourself a tennis fan? More like a fan of personal compensation via tennis.

:cool:
We will see in two weeks the same script repeat itself if those two meet
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
The protected ranking does not prevent your actual points from dropping. It's only used to determine entry into tournaments. But now Fed will be seeded in the Top 4 and enjoy the benefits of this, including his easier draws and first round byes

This makes a significant difference
Federer doesn't need, nor requires any such "benefits", and considering his last stint as someone who dropped significantly through the rankings due to injury, it didn't play any role in his results. Not to speak that it is a whole other debate having absolutely nothing to do with benefits for a competition about ranking points.

We will see in two weeks the same script repeat itself if those two meet
That doesn't say much about your attitude here, which is not based on actually knowing the results in two weeks.

:cool:
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Federer doesn't need, nor requires any such "benefits", and considering his last stint as someone who dropped significantly through the rankings due to injury, it didn't play any role in his results. Not to speak that it is a whole other debate having absolutely nothing to do with benefits for a competition about ranking points.
And you saw how that draw panned out? He was able to navigate it, but it was harder than if he had been ranked higher

Not to mention this will give him additional weeks/consecutive weeks at the Top 5, ensure he gets records like oldest player to be ranked Top X, etc

That doesn't say much about your attitude here, which is not based on actually knowing the results in two weeks.

:cool:
Fait accompli
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
And you saw how that draw panned out? He was able to navigate it, but it was harder than if he had been ranked higher
I saw that he went through it like a champ, so as I said, he doesn't need such "benefits". However, some others DO need them, and it is painfully obvious also by the reactions of their fans.

Not to mention this will give him additional weeks/consecutive weeks at the Top 5, ensure he gets records like oldest player to be ranked Top X, etc
I don't for a second think that you believe that the above crap you wrote bears any real significance over anything.

:cool:
 
Top