Fendrich: Ranking System Needs a Fix
從另一個角度來思考Kim登上No.1的價值及意義.
Fendrich: Ranking System Needs a Fix
By HOWARD FENDRICH
AP Tennis Writer
Maybe it's time for the WTA Tour to consider a new ranking system, one that
rewards pure excellence over pure consistency.
By any standard, Kim Clijsters is a fantastic tennis player, among the best
in the world. But is she really No. 1? No way.
Until Monday, that distinction rightly belonged to Serena Williams, who
earned it by winning five of the past six Grand Slam titles. Clijsters never
has won a major championship - the first top-ranked player with that lacuna
on her record.
The trouble is, the complicated formula used by the WTA Tour bases rankings
on the preceding 12 months, assigning points for how a player fares at her
best 17 tournaments in that span.
So Clijsters was able to supplant Williams at No. 1 Monday, the 12th woman
to hold that spot since computer rankings began in 1975.
The change is largely due to this: Clijsters has played in 22 tournaments
over the past 52 weeks, while Williams has played in 11. The Belgian gets
points from 17 events in that span (with a tour-high nine titles), while
Williams must make do with points from 11 events (and seven titles).
Jeff Sagarin, whose college football rankings for USA Today are part of
the Bowl Championship Series formula, thinks one of the problems with
tennis rankings is they don't account for margins of victory. And, he points
out, "they go by volume."
Sagarin developed a system for grading tennis in the 1970s, though he hasn't
applied it to the current women's game.
"It seems that Serena Williams wins every time. My hunch is that my system
would have her No. 1," Sagarin said. "And it's not like she's playing kids
in elementary school. She's beating the best at the top tournaments."
Williams owns an 8-1 career edge over Clijsters. How has Clijsters fared
against other top players, one measure of greatness? She's 2-5 against
Venus Williams, and has lost three of her last four matches against No. 3
Justine Henin-Hardenne.
Not one player in the top 20 has a winning record against Serena.
It's also telling that apologists for the current ranking system use one
word over and over: "consistent."
"The ranking is a balance between the results and the major events, and
rewards consistent performance over a long season from January to November,"
WTA Tour CEO Larry Scott said in a recent telephone interview. "Kim, while
she has not won some of the majors, has been a consistent performer, won a
lot of tournaments and played a lot of events."
And here's what Martina Navratilova - whose 331 weeks at No. 1 are second
to Steffi Graf's 377 - said about Clijsters: "She is very consistent and
has won a whole bunch of tournaments, so she's earned it."
Indeed, Clijsters reached the semifinals at all 14 tournaments she's played
in 2003, collecting a tour-leading six titles.
But sports is supposed to be about the spectacular, and athletes are
celebrated for transcending what are thought to be the bounds of their games.
That's one of the reasons we're fixated with statistics and records.
And in individual events such as tennis and golf, it's the major
championships that define greatness.
Actually, it might be time for tennis to take its cue from golf, where the
player who clearly is the best, Tiger Woods, is entrenched at No. 1.
There are two big differences between the sports' rating systems, two
elements that tennis might want to look into:
- golf compares players' results over two years;
- golf takes a point total and divides it by the number of tournaments
(with a minimum of 40) for an average score.
That way, players don't lose as much ground when sidelined by injury
(Serena hasn't played since Wimbledon and had left knee surgery Aug. 1).
By no means is Clijsters' rise to No. 1 the oddest in tennis history. That
distinction probably belongs to Yevgeny Kafelnikov, who moved atop the men's
rankings in May 1999 on the heels of six straight first-round losses.
Clijsters figures she deserves her new standing. There is something to be
said, after all, for competing with the best, week in, week out, and faring
well - if not overwhelmingly.
Asked last week about her probable ascension, Clijsters pointed out the
reason for her success.
"I've played about three times as many tournaments as Serena. It's not that
if you win one tournament, you have to be No. 1," Clijsters said, then
paused before adding: "It's about consistency."
And that's precisely the problem.
--
本文主要是在探討在沒拿過主要滿貫所引發一連串制度的討論，
甚至還引用高爾夫的計分制度來針對受傷所面臨的排名下滑現象.
我覺得大概是個時機的巧合吧，
Serena剛好在這段期間受傷，
而Kim今年的表現一直很穩定，
在自助的情況下配上這時機，
造就了球后的頭銜.
或許目前沒拿GS，
但我個人認為Kim在今年的表現的確值得這個頭銜.
而且他還很辛勞的參加雙打，
這麼努力的成果一定是豐碩的，
再次恭喜Kim:)
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.csie.ntu.edu.tw)
◆ From: 218.167.191.197
推
推 61.70.210.37 08/13, , 1F
推 61.70.210.37 08/13, 1F