Andy's points to defend - a twist

eblunt · Club Coach

Andy's points to defend - a twist

Count Zero · Tennis legend

i think you have it about right, the masters/GS's and YEC (if eligable) all have to count, i am not sure if this applies to serious injury cases tho. this year i dont think andy would fare too badly even with bad results in them, as he has plenty of lower scores to lose, at his level now a few points rarely costs much. i haven't looked at the rankings but 11 points wont make much direct negative impact to him (of cousre the lack of masters points earned when he has such a good chance would not be good)

-- Edited by Count Zero at 16:38, 2006-02-20

stevemcqueen · Futures qualifying

I understand your thinking, but I dont it is quite correct. Players have to play all nine masters series events, and these nine events all count towards a players points total. If you don't play a masters series event, you get zero points for it. If you are injured, it makes no difference, you get zero points. However, if your ranking is not high enough to gain direct entry, this rule does not apply and you can include your sixth highest points tournament.

SteveG on his excellent site keeps a list of "zero pointers" to help with comlpicated ranking calculations. He also keeps a copy of every ranking list issued, going back for several years. www.stevegtennis.com There is also a load of other information re. raankings and tournaments and links to tournament websires as well as results.

Bladetiger · Pro player

stevemcqueen wrote:

I understand your thinking, but I dont it is quite correct. Players have to play all nine masters series events, and these nine events all count towards a players points total. If you don't play a masters series event, you get zero points for it. If you are injured, it makes no difference, you get zero points. However, if your ranking is not high enough to gain direct entry, this rule does not apply and you can include your sixth highest points tournament. SteveG on his excellent site keeps a list of "zero pointers" to help with comlpicated ranking calculations. He also keeps a copy of every ranking list issued, going back for several years. www.stevegtennis.com There is also a load of other information re. raankings and tournaments and links to tournament websires as well as results.

Yes, but I think what eblunt is saying is that Andy will now qualify, so from now will be losing his least good challenger every time he enters a MS event, so if there are four of those coming up before wimbledon, andy will lose his 4 worst results about 54 points and could be replaced by 4 first rd exits (thoiugh we doubt it) so I believe eblunt has got it right, and it is an interesting point that I hadnt thought of.

Although I think the likely benefit of qualifying by right for MS events will probably outweigh any negative aspects it is true that his points are not fireproof.

eblunt · Club Coach

Bladetiger wrote:

stevemcqueen wrote: I understand your thinking, but I dont it is quite correct. Players have to play all nine masters series events, and these nine events all count towards a players points total. If you don't play a masters series event, you get zero points for it. If you are injured, it makes no difference, you get zero points. However, if your ranking is not high enough to gain direct entry, this rule does not apply and you can include your sixth highest points tournament. SteveG on his excellent site keeps a list of "zero pointers" to help with comlpicated ranking calculations. He also keeps a copy of every ranking list issued, going back for several years. www.stevegtennis.com There is also a load of other information re. raankings and tournaments and links to tournament websires as well as results. Yes, but I think what eblunt is saying is that Andy will now qualify, so from now will be losing his least good challenger every time he enters a MS event, so if there are four of those coming up before wimbledon, andy will lose his 4 worst results about 54 points and could be replaced by 4 first rd exits (thoiugh we doubt it) so I believe eblunt has got it right, and it is an interesting point that I hadnt thought of. Although I think the likely benefit of qualifying by right for MS events will probably outweigh any negative aspects it is true that his points are not fireproof.

Yes - I guess what I'm trying to point out (not very well) is that currently Andy has 14 "non MS or GS" results in his best 18 scores. By the end of Roland G, 6 of those 14 scores will be replaced by 5 masters scores and RG score, REGARDLESS of whether the new scroes are better or not.

I don't think its a problem - these are only 5-15 pointers, which I'm sure he'll improve on. Luckily he has only 5 big scores in non GS/MS tourneys, - 2 challenger wins, Basel Bangkok and San Jose.