Rating on public relationsIn tennis have dissolved double-entry bookkeeping
the Rating on public relations
Many long years the Association of tennis players of professionals (ATP) used difficult enough system on which it was very difficult to predict situation development otherwise for calculation of a rating of players. From this season the association has decided to simplify system and has entered new, at first sight more clear way of counting of points. Only it has turned out on the contrary - still has more got confused.
its complexity was the Main lack of old system of calculation. Let`s remind that at definition of a rating of the tennis player were considered 14 best results shown by it on tournaments within last 52 weeks. Thus players had to protect constantly the points earned on this or that tournament. For example, if one year ago the tennis player has won Roland Garros at least not to lose in a rating, the next year it was necessary to win again it (tennis tournaments, as a rule, pass annually in the same terms). But also it did not guarantee preservation of a rating position as it was necessary to consider and the so-called bonus points charged for victories over sejanymi by tennis players. In a word, to count up, how many points will receive or the tennis player will lose, it was extremely difficult.
in this season ATP has passed at first sight to more clear scheme. Now tennis players begin each season with zero - last year`s points are not considered in any way. It would Seem, all is clear. But only at first sight.
Earlier rating ATP, despite all its complexity, completely reflected alignment of forces in tennis. For example, on old system Pit Sampras now would take of the third position. If to take a new variant it only the sixth, and advances one of the best tennis players in the history of such player as 19 - summer Llejton Hjuitt - the tennis player promising, but no more that. For an illustration: on old calculation it only the fourteenth.
still one year ago the high place in a rating promised to the tennis player set of pleasant things. We will tell, advertising contracts. Now the rating has turned to something unconvincing. The main thing, it that value of a title of the first racket of the world was in many respects levelled as to head a rating it is possible and voleju a case. For example, before the Australian championship Fabris Santoro was the leader. Well and at whom language will turn to name its first racket of the world? And if to “ a new era “ Tennis players though in the career occupying a tennis throne, it was possible to count time on fingers now all of them and you will not consider.
the following unpleasant moment which is a direct consequence of introduction of new system of calculation, is the terrible mess arising at fans at definition sejanyh of tennis players on tournaments. Earlier practically at all competitions of players “ sowed “ according to an occupied position in tables of ranks. It was clear, why Agassi or Kafelnikov receive the first numbers. Now it is absolutely unevident. The paradox consists that ATP on - former considers an old rating, but only for internal using. And organizers of tournaments proceed from it at crops of tennis players and definition of the players having the admission to competitions directly. Other criteria simply are not present.
Now it will be possible to name the present first racket of the world only upon termination of a season. But agree, it is unfair that the tennis player, having put weight of efforts for achievement of the treasured purpose, with the beginning of next year will lose all turned out luggage. Certainly, it is possible to object that absolutely identical rule exists in overwhelming majority of sports disciplines. In the same football every year commands begin on equal terms. But tennis - not football. It is a special sport which cannot be tired out in frameworks of one championship.
viability of innovations becomes obvious only in the beginning of the next year. While it is faster experiment, than real alternative let and difficult, but it is good itself to the system which has recommended for much years.
ROBERT - DAMBEGOV