I'm contemplating changing the scoring system for next year to get more points scored for the WR especially. Perhaps more bands (2.5% instead of 5%) and changing the weighting to make it easier to get points for the top players. For example, Jack is currently WR11, but if you predicted WR15 you don't get any points and I think that you should get points for even WR19. So I want to introduce a sliding scale. Any thoughts ?
I'm contemplating changing the scoring system for next year to get more points scored for the WR especially. Perhaps more bands (2.5% instead of 5%) and changing the weighting to make it easier to get points for the top players. For example, Jack is currently WR11, but if you predicted WR15 you don't get any points and I think that you should get points for even WR19. So I want to introduce a sliding scale. Any thoughts ?
I'll have a think but looking at how things have been turning out, it's clearly currently an atrocious unfair system
I'm contemplating changing the scoring system for next year to get more points scored for the WR especially. Perhaps more bands (2.5% instead of 5%) and changing the weighting to make it easier to get points for the top players. For example, Jack is currently WR11, but if you predicted WR15 you don't get any points and I think that you should get points for even WR19. So I want to introduce a sliding scale. Any thoughts ?
I'll have a think but looking at how things have been turning out, it's clearly currently an atrocious unfair system
Certainly is - I have only 3 points for the women's world rankings, yet I have 8 of the current top 10 in my choices.
I'm contemplating changing the scoring system for next year to get more points scored for the WR especially. Perhaps more bands (2.5% instead of 5%) and changing the weighting to make it easier to get points for the top players. For example, Jack is currently WR11, but if you predicted WR15 you don't get any points and I think that you should get points for even WR19. So I want to introduce a sliding scale. Any thoughts ?
Yes - the percentage weighting in the example you give seems wrong, I agree
Maybe for players with a ranking higher than 50 the percentage system could be changed to number limits. Eg, player ranked 30, anyone who guesses within 5 gets maximum points, within 10 ether way gets 4, etc.
Thanks for the suggestions. I woke up this morning with some ideas running through my head and have looked at ways of implementing them. An increase in maximum points to 200 with a greater spread of rankings earning points up to a maximum of 10 and a weighted percentage for players inside the top 100. Still tweaking the parameters though.
1. Jack D - 8 2. Cam N - 32 3. Jake F - 70 4. Dan E - 98 5. JoMo - 125 6. Paul J - 135 7. Kyle E - 175 8. Billy H - 180 9. Jack PJ - 185 10. Jay C - 190
Sub - Ryan P - 150
Hi TA - can I please swap in Ryan for Paul Jubb? Thanks
Just realised what a mess my mid table picks here are - from Evo down through Kyle and incl Ryan, disaster. Whyd I swap out Jubby when Kyle then goes and retires. My top end and lower end are pretty decent but that mid table group is a buggars muddle!
Just a few thoughts, as a clear expert in the men's ranking predictions
With just 2 weeks to go for challenger entries, it is very close for GB 4 & 5, and then GB 6 down to 13, most particularly 8 to 10 ( with double entries behind them from 11 & 12 ). So there could certainly still be quite a number of game changers. Just Ryan ( 25 points on 01/12 ) of these players has any further counting 2024 points due to drop off.
GB positions, live ranking positions ( with all now out for current week 46 ) and tournament entries listed are currently:
4. LR 124 Billy H 490 points - week 47 entry 5. LR 129 Jan C 484 - week 47 & 48 entries
6. LR 182 Dan E 317 7. LR 190 Oliver C 300 - week 47 entry 8. LR 195 Arthur F 288 - week 48 entry 9. LR 196 Jack PJ 287 10. LR 197 Ryan P 287 - 25 ( net 21 ) points to drop on 01/12 11. LR 206 George L 280 - week 47 & 48 entries 12. LR 210 Jay C 273 - week 47 & 48 entries 13. LR 234 Johannus M 243
I thought about a month or so ago that Dan might get swallowed up but some of the following players have come a bit off the boil, though it's still been very good progress overall this year.
-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 13th of November 2025 10:27:27 AM
For the women, Limoge finishes on the 14 December, so I am thinking of making the final competition close with the rankings of 15 December for both men and women.
For the women, Limoge finishes on the 14 December, so I am thinking of making the final competition close with the rankings of 15 December for both men and women.
That sounds very logical and sensible - no point in waiting for ITF season to close, but WTA 125's makes sense.
Maybe there is a case for closing the mens at the end of the challengers? ie earlier than the womens?
I also wonder if making it a fixed date in future years (assuming you still want to run it) makes sense - ie end of Challengers for men and end of WTA 125's for women, or just a fixed date of end of week 48 or 50 or whatever?
A good point. Men's challengers finish at the end of November, so two weeks earlier. I'll review the entry lists nearer the time to check, but any ITF's probably won't affect the competition anyway. There are seven players currently ranked outside the top 300 that feature in the predictions (including Kyle, Charles B and Liam) but I don't think anu of them are scoring points in the competition.
A good point. Men's challengers finish at the end of November, so two weeks earlier. I'll review the entry lists nearer the time to check, but any ITF's probably won't affect the competition anyway. There are seven players currently ranked outside the top 300 that feature in the predictions (including Kyle, Charles B and Liam) but I don't think anu of them are scoring points in the competition.
Liam is on a bit of a run this week, semis in a challenger in Lyon. And looks like he is sitting on a decent ranking rise of 40-50 places and maybe more. But I doubt he will be playing post the Challengers ending - he is in one in Bergamo next week and then Liam and Charles are both currently in an M25 week 48 in Czechia; Kyle has obviously retired!
So I wonder what effect Jay's surge up from GB #12 to GB #6 ( in tomorrow's rankings ), plus his world rankings rise, will have at the top of our table. I subbed Jay in to the GB # 6 position but I'm not quite a contender
A few other lesser changes in and around the top 10 in these last 2 weeks, including Jan overtaking Billy for GB #4.