Week 16 - ITF ($50K) - Dothan, AL, USA - clay

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

Week 16 - ITF ($50K) - Dothan, AL, USA - clay

Osomec · Junior player

Does the Americans soft spot for Watson account for her having entered this tournament as a JE? And what is a JE?

Josh · Challenger level

Junior Exempt. Don't know the exact details (I'm sure many others will know) but she has a certain number of senior entries based on her high (top 5?) year-end junior ranking from last year.

Osomec · Junior player

That's nice for Heather, but it doesn't seem fair on Laura when she has a higher senior ranking and a better record as a junior, despite what the rankings say. The junior ranking system needs a major overhaul.

johnnylad · Tennis legend

Its completely fairLaura got them last year in the year after her best junior exploits. Heather is getting them this year.

I think anyone suggesting Laura isn't getting her fair share of leg ups into tournaments would be wrong.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Laura benefitted from them last year.
Pretty sure Heather has 2 50ks and 1 25k so with using another one next week she will have 1 25k left for the rest of the year.

Osomec · Junior player

I made no such suggestion, but Laura has done more than Heather in the last year, as well as the year before that. The rankings that place Heather above Laura are just plain wrong. The bonus points for winning a junior grand slam final are excessive, and the system flat out doesn't work because the top junior girls don't play enough juniors for them to be remotely accurate. The seedings in girls junior grand slams are often painfully absurd. It was obvious that the girl who won the junior Australian Open had a better overall record than most of the seeds, so it was no surprise when she won the tournament as an unseeded player, and it was no surprise that Laura made the final as an unseeded player either. When a system is that broke it needs to be fixed.

-- Edited by Osomec on Wednesday 21st of April 2010 03:44:58 PM

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

I disagree with you, Heather was a GS winner last year, Laura wasnt. If Laura wanted to play a full Junior season and get the JEs then she could, but shes doing things her own way instead. I think being #1 or #2 gives u slightly better JE chances than 3-5. I think information is available on the ITF junior site.

Osomec · Junior player

Heather did very little other than win that one grand slam. The points awarded for the win are wildly disproportionate. The distribution of points is totally different from that in seniors. If you are saying that the junior system is right, you are also saying that the senior system is wildly wrong? Is that actually your opinion?

johnnylad · Tennis legend

Junior ranking can only depend on results in junior events.

You can't say this person is too good for junior tennis so we'll make her Number 1

johnnylad · Tennis legend

One slam win in senior tennis would guarantee you top 50? Plus you're a full time pro so the points are spread out amongst the "mandatory" tournaments required of you????????

Josh · Challenger level

I may be wrong, but also don't they only count the top 6 results in the rankings?

Osomec · Junior player

More than 2/3rds of Heather's current junior singles points are from the one tournament. She hasn't made the semis of any other junior tournament in the last 12 months. She went out in the first round of three of the last four junior grand slams. Laura did better than Heather in three out of four grand slams and in the one where she didn't she made the semis. So how can that translate to a better ranking for Heather than for Laura? The answer is because there are 250 bonus points for winning a grand slam final on top of the 250 for winning the tournament. This is like giving senior players 4,000 points for a grand slam and restricting their overall ranking to the best 6 results.

This isn't a Heather v. Laura thing, I support both of them, but the system is ridiculous. The fundamental reason for this is that the girls split their time between junior and pro events - it's hardly an issue for the boys. There is no perfect answer, but two options would make the junior rankings a lot more reliable than they are now. Either restrict the girls rankings to 16 and under players, which in developmental terms would make them equivalent to the boys rankings. Or give bonus points in the junior rankings for senior performances. The latter system is used in golf, where amateur players get credit in the World Amateur Golf rankings for performances in professional tournaments.

-- Edited by Osomec on Wednesday 21st of April 2010 04:05:35 PM

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

If you win a slam on the senior tour your ranking would be 26, with 15 more countable events to add to that including 3 other majors.

If slam winners shouldnt be ranked within the top 5, where do you feel they would be best ranked?

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

Osomec wrote:

More than 2/3rds of Heather's current junior singles points are from the one tournament. She hasn't made the semis of any other junior tournament in the last 12 months. She went out in the first round of three of the last four junior grand slams. Laura did better than Heather in three out of four grand slams and in the one where she didn't she made the semis. So how can that translate to a better ranking for Heather than for Laura? The answer is because there are 250 bonus points for winning a grand slam final on top of the 250 for winning the tournament. This is like giving senior players 4,000 points for a grand slam and restricting their overall ranking to the best 6 results.

This isn't a Heather v. Laura thing, I support both of them, but the system is ridiculous. The fundamental reason for this is that the girls split their time between junior and pro events - it's hardly an issue for the boys. There is no perfect answer, but two options would make the junior rankings a lot more reliable than they are now. Either restrict the girls rankings to 16 and under players, which in developmental terms would make them equivalent to the boys rankings. Or give bonus points in the junior rankings for senior performances. The latter system is used in golf, where amateur players get credit in the World Amateur Golf rankings for performances in professional tournaments.

-- Edited by Osomec on Wednesday 21st of April 2010 04:05:35 PM

I think the slams do credit the players with a good senior ranking, doesnt a snr ranking of top 300 guarantee you entry into the junior slams?