There's definitely some problems with this system - no way am I better than Tim Chisholm! - but there is something to be said for trying to make things work in terms of a ranking that isn't simply handicap based for those outside the top 25.
I shouldn't be able to play meaningless large handicap difference social matches to reduce my handicap and get better seeding for level events.
One thing worth remembering - this ranking is overlaying one set of rules onto results which are influenced by a different set of incentives. If you can avoid playing tournaments and keep your seed, then why would you put your handicap at risk by playing minor tournaments?
This system rewards match wins, and Chisholm simply has won very few singles matches over the last 2 years - usually bundling out of the first rounds of Opens and not playing the “second tier” tournaments. In a way, what this is saying is that he his no longer as good as the top ~20 players but we haven’t actually seen much evidence in the last 2 years of who he is still better than, so is rather heavily penalised.
It’s worth pointing out that should this be formally adopted their would likely be a wildcard system that can help out players with few results, thinking here of the likes of Josh Smith who haven’t played in over 12 months due to injury.
All that said, that’s not to say this system is perfect and always happy to hear constructive feedback, especially over a coffee etc.
Fascinating- and thanks for all the thought and effort. Very interesting to have an alternative and closely argued perspective. I think you may well be correct- but I need more time to digest this!
Thanks Ben - makes sense even if it's not wholly intuitive. If you're around during the Amateur, there might be time for a chat
There's definitely some problems with this system - no way am I better than Tim Chisholm! - but there is something to be said for trying to make things work in terms of a ranking that isn't simply handicap based for those outside the top 25.
I shouldn't be able to play meaningless large handicap difference social matches to reduce my handicap and get better seeding for level events.
One thing worth remembering - this ranking is overlaying one set of rules onto results which are influenced by a different set of incentives. If you can avoid playing tournaments and keep your seed, then why would you put your handicap at risk by playing minor tournaments?
This system rewards match wins, and Chisholm simply has won very few singles matches over the last 2 years - usually bundling out of the first rounds of Opens and not playing the “second tier” tournaments. In a way, what this is saying is that he his no longer as good as the top ~20 players but we haven’t actually seen much evidence in the last 2 years of who he is still better than, so is rather heavily penalised.
It’s worth pointing out that should this be formally adopted their would likely be a wildcard system that can help out players with few results, thinking here of the likes of Josh Smith who haven’t played in over 12 months due to injury.
All that said, that’s not to say this system is perfect and always happy to hear constructive feedback, especially over a coffee etc.
Fascinating- and thanks for all the thought and effort. Very interesting to have an alternative and closely argued perspective. I think you may well be correct- but I need more time to digest this!