Week 34 - Belgium F10 ($15,000) - Lambermont (clay)

the addict · Tennis legend

Week 34 - Belgium F10 ($15,000) - Lambermont (clay)

indiana · Tennis legend

Aww that would make it much less err interesting ( re the ATP and WTA doing things the same ).

Yes, in singles a maximum 18 counters for the men, 16 for the women and for doubles 18 again for the men but just 11 for the women.

Re Billy currently indeed 26 points from 16 counters ( 1s and 2s apart from one SF 6 ). This tournament adds one counter on 11/09 though he has two counters coming off then. So in running for 11/09, 25 points from 15 counters with next week hopefully taking him back again to 16 counters then.

-- Edited by indiana on Wednesday 23rd of August 2017 02:45:47 PM

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
Tx. I think you might be right (again ).

Wouldn't it be nice if the ATP and WTA, and the ITF, all made friends and played nice and came up with a consistent set of rules????

Yes. Especially in the light of that article about Andy today, it seems bizarre that the women play 16 while the men play 18 to maximize scoring opportunities. This is another area where equality would be a good thing.

indiana · Tennis legend

And that maximum 16 for the women includes the 'turning up' points in MDs from ITF 25Ks up and WTA qualifying. Apart from in mandatories ( though just in singles and non WC ) the men have to actually win matches.

PS: though for the men the mandatory event singles WC R1 exit is still a counter, just a zero counter, as is the doubles R1 exit ( though actually these are not truly 'mandatories' in doubles ).

We should have a quiz

-- Edited by indiana on Wednesday 23rd of August 2017 02:51:20 PM

Etienne · Club Coach

Ah disappointing. Normally a flurry of posts in a futures thread means a decent win, but while it's always useful to get an update on the arcane rules of the ITF, it's less enjoyable than reading about a victory.

wolf · Tennis legend

Bob in Spain wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Tx. I think you might be right (again ).

Wouldn't it be nice if the ATP and WTA, and the ITF, all made friends and played nice and came up with a consistent set of rules????
Yes. Especially in the light of that article about Andy today, it seems bizarre that the women play 16 while the men play 18 to maximize scoring opportunities. This is another area where equality would be a good thing.

In fairness the WTA season is shorter than ATP so it makes sense. Now just make the very long ATP season shorter, and reduce it to 16 counters.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

QF: (3) Billy Harris & Mateusz Terczyinski (POL) CR 1816 (996+820) def. Buvaysar Gadamauri & Turpal Gadamauri (BEL/BEL) UNR 6-2 6-3

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

SF: (3) Billy Harris & Mateusz Terczyinski (POL) CR 1816 (996+820) vs Germain Gigounon & Simon Stevens (BEL/BEL) UNR (1230+0)

Topemp · Strong Club Player

Etienne wrote:
Ah disappointing. Normally a flurry of posts in a futures thread means a decent win, but while it's always useful to get an update on the arcane rules of the ITF, it's less enjoyable than reading about a victory.

This.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

SF: Germain Gigounon & Simon Stevens (BEL/BEL) UNR (1230+0) defeated (3) Billy Harris & Mateusz Terczyinski (POL) CR 1816 (996+820) by 2 & 2 bleh

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

wolf wrote:
Bob in Spain wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Tx. I think you might be right (again ).

Wouldn't it be nice if the ATP and WTA, and the ITF, all made friends and played nice and came up with a consistent set of rules????
Yes. Especially in the light of that article about Andy today, it seems bizarre that the women play 16 while the men play 18 to maximize scoring opportunities. This is another area where equality would be a good thing.
In fairness the WTA season is shorter than ATP so it makes sense. Now just make the very long ATP season shorter, and reduce it to 16 counters.

Agree with this totally, season too long and too many tournaments. Less tournaments more prize money, especially lower down the levels.