That's all true but the ranking points system assumes that the prize money defines the standard of the tournament and that the fact that there are 56 players in the main draw instead of the usual 32 makes it easier to qualify, because 24 of the players who would have been in qualifying aren't there because they're already in the main draw.
Unfortunately, this sytem takes no account of what actually makes players go to a tournament, e.g. you have to work a lot harder for each ranking point at Surbiton because it is the only grass court warm-up event before the end of RG and you have to work a lot harder for each ranking point at Queen's because it is one of just two pre-Wimby ATPs on grass and because playing at Queen's rather than Halle allows people to 'settle' in London for an extended period rather than having to decamp from Paris to Germany first.
johnnylad wrote:
I don't get why Queens and Halle offer the same prize money and allow 4 qualifiers each into their main draw but in Halle you get 10 points and at Queens you get 5 points.
So there are more MD players at Queens, but it was a tougher qualifying draw for 1/2 the points?
__________________
GB on a shirt, Davis Cup still gleaming, 79 years of hurt, never stopped us dreaming ... 29/11/2015 that dream came true!
First round losers at Queen's on average get more TV coverage, attract more spectators and more event sponsorship than losing finalists at Challengers.
Just been watching the BBC coverage of queens and the amount of times Sue has been refering to ward as Jamie Ward instead of James is a joke and quite embarassing really
You didn't honestly expect anyone within the British tennis world to actually learn the names of any player not called either Jamie or Andy Murray? Wake up and smell the ignorance
Not only do they keep Wardy 'Jamie', they also say he has never played a ATP event before! But of course you can't expect the BBC to research these things!