Post a reply

Perfect argument for fully Rolling Rankings

Postby Witz78

Ive always been in favour of the rolling rankings system and campaigned for it for many years, so was glad to see it finally brought in last season, albeit it in a partial way.

I would have prefered totally rolling rankings to be implemented but i accepted the current set up as an improvement.

But thinking about the calendar this season plus the cut off points has got me thinking how flawed the systems still is, and why we now need a proper rolling ranking system.

And before anyone tries, dont give me that old baloney about it being too hard to adminster and complicated / hassle etc. Tennis and golf usually have 4 or 5 different tournaments on each week, as well as 1,000s of players making up their rankings but they never fail to have an official new list issued every Monday.

1-SEEDING CUT OFF FOR THE UK, MASTERS, GERMAN MASTERS AND SKY SHOOTOUT

This happens after the Shanghai Masters in September.

there are 4 more PTCs played before the UK Champs but i will overlook that issue.

Flaw 1 The so called elite Masters top 16 line up is determined 4 months in advance when there is still the UK Champs plus 6 PTC events to be played. Surely it would be better to update the rankings just before the Masters so the true top 16 are there, especially considering theres 20,000 points to play for after the cut off point before the Masters takes place.

Flaw 2 Likewise the German Masters and Sky Shootout which take place in later Jan / early Feb are pre-determined so far in advance. By taking the rankings into account just before the Sky Shootout for example then the tour newcomers would have 20,000 points extra to play for and a far better chance of making it into the top 64 and gaining their first exposure in a TV tournament probably.

2 - SEEDING CUT OFF FOR THE WORLD OPEN, CHINA OPEN, WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS AND POTENTIAL INDIAN OPEN

Flaw 3 Arguably the worst of all here is that the line up for the World Championship, even though the qualifiers take place directly before the Championships this year, will be determined possibly FOUR tournaments in advance. The cut off takes place after the Welsh Open in February even though there will be the World Open, PTC Finals, China Open and potentially an Indian ranker taking place in the 2 months between the Welsh and Worlds. Thats potentially 22,000 ranking points at stake in that pre-World period after the cut off that will bear no relevance to the Worlds which could make a mockery of the line up in Sheffield where we could have a lot of players who are clearly no longer top 16 material managing to qualify automatically. This used to happen under the old system but we did away with it because it protected players out of form too long, as far as i can see, this new rolling system still protects out of form players to an extent and hinders in form players as it doesnt update after each event.

Flaw 4 This is a knock on effect of Flaw 3, that by not updating the rankings after all of these events just before the Worlds, they are minmising the importance of these events abroad, which are traditionally viewed as low on the priority of many top players, what with the World Championships just around the corner. With the heavy schedule in March, its inevitable with the pressure off for the top players in terms of making it to Sheffield, that the elite will pick and choose what they play in. This is when a Race to Sheffield would have been great as had the rankings not been updated till just before the Worlds, then all the players would have been giving it their all and scrambling for vital points, which would have raised the profile and interest levels in these tournaments far higher.
Last edited by Witz78 on 04 Aug 2011, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Perfect argument for fully Rolling Rankings

Postby Monique

Well AGAINST a full rolling system is the small matter of organising the qualifiers.
In such a system they have to happen just before each tournament. On sporting ground it's sensible but with a full calendar it's not practical at all. It's not just about working out the draws.
- It means that qualifiers can't overlap an event, even invitational because invitations are primarily issued based on rankings. For the record already THIS season we have qualifiers running during the Masters.
- It also means that overseas events can't follow each other immediately while this would be the sensible thing to do to minimise traveling tiredness and expenses for the players and the officials because qualifs have to happen in-between and you won't move the 100 players around the world. It's just neither sensible, nor feasible.
- It further means that qualifying players will only be able to book accommodations and travels last minute which will cost them even more than now while many already struggle to make a decent living out of the sport.

They could have a cut-off point just before the WC indeed, provided there is enough time between the last "other" tournament and the WC, but otherwise the current situation is a good compromise.

Re: Perfect argument for fully Rolling Rankings

Postby SnookerFan

Monique wrote:Well AGAINST a full rolling system is the small matter of organising the qualifiers.
In such a system they have to happen just before each tournament. On sporting ground it's sensible but with a full calendar it's not practical at all. It's not just about working out the draws.
- It means that qualifiers can't overlap an event, even invitational because invitations are primarily issued based on rankings. For the record already THIS season we have qualifiers running during the Masters.
- It also means that overseas events can't follow each other immediately while this would be the sensible thing to do to minimise traveling tiredness and expenses for the players and the officials because qualifs have to happen in-between and you won't move the 100 players around the world. It's just neither sensible, nor feasible.
- It further means that qualifying players will only be able to book accommodations and travels last minute which will cost them even more than now while many already struggle to make a decent living out of the sport.

They could have a cut-off point just before the WC indeed, provided there is enough time between the last "other" tournament and the WC, but otherwise the current situation is a good compromise.


Yeah, I remember we discussed the possibility on break-down of a roll ranking a few years back, where it changed every month. This was the season they had the Bahrain Championship, and there was at least one ranker every month of the season, apart from January which had the Masters. The downside was that wasn't practical, as people could be in the top-16 one month, and not the next. It would be an administrative nightmare.

I'm not against rolling ranking systems though, as long as it's do-able though.


   

cron