The year 2009 was a historic year for some tennis players in tennis. The beginning of tears Roger Federer after failing to capture the Australian Open, along with 14 of the Grand Slam, culminating with the acquittal of the Davis Cup for the Czech Republic from Spain, and the year saw a lot of achievements by the players and some of the best ever tennis. In distress between Federer and the celebration in Spain, there was also a famous Soderling beat Rafael Nadal at the French Open, Juan Martin del Potro for the first title in a Grand Slam at the U.S. Open. And not to forget Davyedenko Nicolai, who won the world championship round finals in November All in all, the year that do not forget, do not forget with the tennis, especially Wimbledon final between Roger Federer and American Andy Roddick, who is definitely the best game of the year so far.
In addition to all this, there was a lot of work on the ATP circuit, with players fighting tooth and nail for titles and ranking points. Gone are the days when there was only Pete Sampras and Roger Federer or dominate the sport. Today, each of the ten top players to compete enough to give anyone from nominating himself for the money. A good example is, of course, Robin Soderling, who was at number 9 in the world, beat world number one Rafael Nadal 2, number 3 of the world, Novak Djokovic, in the year ended Barkley Cycling World Championships finals. Unfortunately he did not win in the tournament, but finished the year ranked No. 8 in the rankings for tennis 2009.
Taking into account the competitiveness on the ATP circuit, and the struggle to arrange the points championship, it makes sense to see how the top players is unique in various tournaments throughout the year. But before we move on to the championships, let's take a quick look at the various tournaments, and classification procedures, and calendar year of the tennis men.How Does ATP Work Order tennis?
Classification system in the championship men's tennis is a bit confusing to explain properly. The way it works is that the player gets a point for the tournaments to play in. Of course, any particular point of the tournament continues to grow with the level of player to reach the tournament itself. For example, consider the four tournament rounds, quarterfinals, semifinals, and final after that. Players will receive more points for more than they provide in the tournament. This means, you may be losing the first round, get 5 points, while the loser in the semi-final may get 200 points. Winner, of course, gets the largest number of points. Called the points championship points and the order used to determine the rankings of players for this year.
Unfortunately, is not that simple though. There are two or three of these fluctuations that can boggle the mind the classification system at the beginning. In the development of the first is that there are various tournaments that provide different points. For example, the progress of the tennis Grand Slam 2000 ranking points for the winner, while the World Championship Tour events, but another 250 to 250 points for the winner. Of course, there are only four Grand Slams in a year, while there are about 40 World Championship Tour of 250 events per year, so it works out. Therefore, there are different tournaments throughout the year - Grand Slam, ATP Tour events 1000, Championship Tour events 500 250 Championship Tour events, and Challenger and a series of futures contracts, which give all the different points of the players, and again, depending on the extent of progress which progress in the tournament.
In the evolution of the second, which makes this level it is difficult to understand the concept of 'rolling points system', and together with the amount of titles and one that can play in the year. Concept is rolling out something where they are to keep the points that player earns championships until the next time you talked of those tournaments, any one year, and when competing in this tournament again, and his performance in the tournament, which will determine the points to him. Confused? Let me explain with an example. Let's say a player to win the U.S. Open 2009. Because he gets to 2000 points, respectively. This 2000 ranking points to stay with him until the U.S. Open in 2010, where his performance at the U.S. Open 2010 will receive ranking points. If he wins the title again, then he keeps 'or' defends his 2000 points. However, if he lost in the semi-finals, and he gets to 1000 points only, and thus losing the effectiveness of the 1000 points from 2000 points earlier. If you can not play in the tournament, he is unable to defend his points and loses them all. This is calculated by the system to all competitions, building on the calendar week Championship 52.
And the third is the transformation of a number of tournaments taken into account for this arrangement. And identified a number of championship tournaments, which are taken and the order of the points counted towards the end of the standings. Grand slam grand slam 0.8 World Championship Tour Masters 1000 and fiscal year ended Barclay Championship World Tour finals are the events which count towards the assessment of the top players. In addition to these 12 1 [you have to qualify for the Barclay's Championship World Tour Finals] tournaments, the player 4 best results of World Championship Tennis 500 round and 2 best results from the [World Championship Tour Series 250, including the Challenger series and the future and are] in the order. So, there is a total of 18 1 tournaments that seem to ATP while determining the top players. More on the types of tournaments later.
Classification system in the championship men's tennis is a bit confusing to explain properly. The way it works is that the player gets a point for the tournaments to play in. Of course, any particular point of the tournament continues to grow with the level of player to reach the tournament itself. For example, consider the four tournament rounds, quarterfinals, semifinals, and final after that. Players will receive more points for more than they provide in the tournament. This means, you may be losing the first round, get 5 points, while the loser in the semi-final may get 200 points. Winner, of course, gets the largest number of points. Called the points championship points and the order used to determine the rankings of players for this year.
Unfortunately, is not that simple though. There are two or three of these fluctuations that can boggle the mind the classification system at the beginning. In the development of the first is that there are various tournaments that provide different points. For example, the progress of the tennis Grand Slam 2000 ranking points for the winner, while the World Championship Tour events, but another 250 to 250 points for the winner. Of course, there are only four Grand Slams in a year, while there are about 40 World Championship Tour of 250 events per year, so it works out. Therefore, there are different tournaments throughout the year - Grand Slam, ATP Tour events 1000, Championship Tour events 500 250 Championship Tour events, and Challenger and a series of futures contracts, which give all the different points of the players, and again, depending on the extent of progress which progress in the tournament.
In the evolution of the second, which makes this level it is difficult to understand the concept of 'rolling points system', and together with the amount of titles and one that can play in the year. Concept is rolling out something where they are to keep the points that player earns championships until the next time you talked of those tournaments, any one year, and when competing in this tournament again, and his performance in the tournament, which will determine the points to him. Confused? Let me explain with an example. Let's say a player to win the U.S. Open 2009. Because he gets to 2000 points, respectively. This 2000 ranking points to stay with him until the U.S. Open in 2010, where his performance at the U.S. Open 2010 will receive ranking points. If he wins the title again, then he keeps 'or' defends his 2000 points. However, if he lost in the semi-finals, and he gets to 1000 points only, and thus losing the effectiveness of the 1000 points from 2000 points earlier. If you can not play in the tournament, he is unable to defend his points and loses them all. This is calculated by the system to all competitions, building on the calendar week Championship 52.
And the third is the transformation of a number of tournaments taken into account for this arrangement. And identified a number of championship tournaments, which are taken and the order of the points counted towards the end of the standings. Grand slam grand slam 0.8 World Championship Tour Masters 1000 and fiscal year ended Barclay Championship World Tour finals are the events which count towards the assessment of the top players. In addition to these 12 1 [you have to qualify for the Barclay's Championship World Tour Finals] tournaments, the player 4 best results of World Championship Tennis 500 round and 2 best results from the [World Championship Tour Series 250, including the Challenger series and the future and are] in the order. So, there is a total of 18 1 tournaments that seem to ATP while determining the top players. More on the types of tournaments later.
No comments:
Post a Comment