Wild wrote:i just think that will be confusing and no need for it
top 16 v 16 qualifiers what's wrong in that
we are now looking for non existent problems when there's enough existing ones that needs sorting
I tend to agree that the top 16 are the elite, ie. the best 16 players at any given time based on the last 2 years points earned, howver below this in the qualifying events, id like to see the teirs of rankings done away with such as 17-32, 33-48 etc.
i think all the qualifiers should be in from round 1 similar to what they did with the German Masters qualifying with all 80 players outwith the top 16 entering in the first qualifying round, though this draw being seeded so where you are in the rankings affects your opponent/s in qualifying.
Its always struck me as unfair that those in the 17-32 bracket had only 1 qualifier compared to 4 for those in the 81-96 bracket. Id open the qualifying so it was a slightly leveller playing field. Be fairer with everyone starting on the same minimum ranking points too and having the same number of games to play in order to qualify. If the ones higher up the rankings are good enough then they will still win and qualify for the venue. If not then they will be found out and will drop down the rankings to a truer position.
The rolling rankings system has helped to make the rankings fairer, this additional change to qualifying set up would truly make everything a level playing field and everyone would end up where they belonged in the rankings, rather than an element of protection still existing for those higher up the rankings. They should have to earn their position like the rest.