Pro rankings- which is more legit?

treo

Semi-Pro
Most knowledgable tennis fans know that the calendar year ATP race standings are not a true representation of the rankings when you can have barely known players in the top 10 in January. Yet the popular media seems to only show the calendar year standings as opposed to the 52-week rolling ATP entry standings. The 2005 standings have Hewitt at 7th as opposed to 2nd in the entry standings. Agassi is 12th as opposed to 6th in the entry standings. When they show the rankings before Wimbeldon there are many clay courters in the top ten who are going to drop way down and never acheive that kind of ranking again until the next clay season. Maybe the media decided that two rankings is confusing and decided to focus on one. The ATP needs to learn from the WTA and have just one system.
 

Rodzilla

Semi-Pro
yea, most knowledgable tennis fans know, but there are also many others who are confused and are mislead by the champions race rankings. I'm also all for following the WTA's lead and have just one system.
 

rhubarb

Hall of Fame
The WTA have two systems too.

They should drop the race, it's not a lot of use really and confuses even tennis fans, let alone others who are less interested in the sport.
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
It came about when the ATP signed a billion dollar deal with ISL. ISL's marketing dept came up with the idea and I guess the ATP had a billion reasons to agree. Anyway, ISL went bankrupt a year after the deal, but the ATP decided to keep both systems. Thats also why the Super Nines got renamed TMS.
 

Rodzilla

Semi-Pro
rhubarb said:
The WTA have two systems too.
yea, I knew there was something fishy about the part when he mentioned the WTA only having one ranking system. I think they have the "entry ranking" system like the ATP and the "Porsche: Race to the Championships." What is the use of the race? To feel a sense of achievement and get recognition?
 
Top