Thank you for clarifying this. It makes more sense now.
Does #1 on WPBA tour mean anything anymore?
- Thread starter DoomCue
- Start date
Thank you for clarifying this. It makes more sense now.
Thanks DoomCue and BVal...I had fun commentating at this tournament. I especially enjoyed being in the booth with Jennifer. She has great knowledge and seems to know a lot of the players well enough to know what's going on with them mentally in the matches. I think would be fantastic on the ESPN TV rounds! Don't get me wrong, I love Ewa and Dawn but if they ever decide to change it up some, Jennifer should be first in line. Does anyone know if she's ever commentated for their TV rounds before?
I am not familiar with how the old ranking system worked so that is why I have no real opinion on which is better. But, I do think that your ranking means nothing until the end of the year. The seeds for each tournament are based on your performance at the past 4 events (which does carry over last year's events if there have not been 4 yet that year) and the rankings don't get you anything until the last tournament of the year.
If a new player comes in on the very first tournament of the year and does phenominal but did not rank in the top 40 at the end of last year, they do not get automatic invites to anything. All tournament invites are based on last year's end of year standings and additional qualifier spots except for the Tour Championship at the end of the year.
Holly Sholes is a great example. She played awesome at the first event and placed 9th but because she didn't have a ranking at the end of last year, her current ranking of 9th doesn't get her anything. So I do think that there is SOME longevity built into the system. The current rankings mean nothing until the end of the year.
If a new player comes in on the very first tournament of the year and does phenominal but did not rank in the top 40 at the end of last year, they do not get automatic invites to anything. All tournament invites are based on last year's end of year standings and additional qualifier spots except for the Tour Championship at the end of the year.
Holly Sholes is a great example. She played awesome at the first event and placed 9th but because she didn't have a ranking at the end of last year, her current ranking of 9th doesn't get her anything. So I do think that there is SOME longevity built into the system. The current rankings mean nothing until the end of the year.
This is a great point Cris.
Based on what is currently in place are there likely to be players who compete in one or two events now and do really well and not get any credit for it as regards requalifying?
This may be something the WPBA board should look at before the change in qualifying/requalifying takes place.
Also I agree, you and Jenn made a great team in the booth.:thumbup2:
What I dont like about the WPBA is the fact that they went to this single elim format. There for you will never know who the number 1 ranked player is cause anyone can win 1 match. I think if you go back to the double elim format you will get a better idea who is the best players.
I thought Jen and yourself did a great job commenting on the match I saw. There was a lot of good insight and there was never a lull in the conversation
I think that's part of why they are changing it. Now players won't have to win several qualifiers just to have a chance to play in enough pro events to end up in high ranking. I think it's better in the long run for the up and coming players that are trying to get on the tour.
No I just meant as regards players like Holly,perhaps yourself, several others who might only have a couple of events under their belts and 1)don't have enough points for exempt,2) don't have enough points to be considered as a requalifying touring pro for the RTC and 3) because of the time on the WPBA haven't managed to compete enough on their regional to qualify for the RTC.
Anyone know why Yu Ram Cha dropped from #5 to #18 after back to back 5-8th finishes? Did she not play Karen Corr in the quarterfinals? The WPBA has her listed as losing to Gerda 9-8 in the round of 16 on the website, winning 9-8 in the brackets and then losing to Karen in the quarterfinals 9-6 on the website and losing 9-7 in the brackets.
Even if she lost in the round of 16, I don't see how it would have dropped her down to #18 in the rankings. Anyone know what actually happened after the redraw?
http://www.wpba.com/pdfs/RankingSummaryPostGLC0209.pdf
Even if she lost in the round of 16, I don't see how it would have dropped her down to #18 in the rankings. Anyone know what actually happened after the redraw?
http://www.wpba.com/pdfs/RankingSummaryPostGLC0209.pdf
I think if they went back to winner-breaks format, it'd go back to Fisher/Corr domination with Jasmine domination mixed in.
In a field full of women who can't string packs, alternate break levels the playing field and is a disadvantage for those women who can.
In a field full of women who can't string packs, alternate break levels the playing field and is a disadvantage for those women who can.
Yu Ram Cha beat Gerda in the round of sixteen 9-8, coming back from 8-4 behind. She then lost to Karen Corr in the quarterfinal, and that was her only loss in the event. She has, as you suggest, finished 5/8 in both events this year.
I don't know poolsnark. Your right it looks like they only counted her points from one tournament. By my count she should have 6500 points which should put her in 6th place on the tour.
I agree that winner breaks would be better for Allison and Karen, but I'll add Ga Young Kim, X Pan, Yu Ram Cha, Kelly Fisher, and about 3 or four more that I'm to lazy to look up right now. The talent of the top ten on the WPBA tour is five times better at least than it was when they changed to alternate break. No one is going dominate anymore for awhile IMO. Johnnyt
I think somehow the links got mixed up with the new rankings...it's fixed now so the rankings are now updated:
http://www.wpba.com/cms/?pid=1000261
Hi there
If you go back to the homepage and click the "Ranking Summary 2009" link again, you'll see that I've posted a corrected ranking summary Yu Ram is listed at #6. Just an honest boo-boo on my part! My profuse apologies. Thanks!
Anne - WPBA
Last edited:
An interesting thread to be sure, but misdirected in some ways. A better thread title would have been "Will Anyone be Able to Defend the #1 Spot on the WPBA Tour Again?". This is the real crux of the matter.
Defending the #1 ranking has become extremely difficult because the depth of talent at the top has become so impressive. Just a few years ago, future hall of famers Allison Fisher and Karen Corr could, seemingly, be penciled into every WPBA Sunday, and between them they were winning most of the tournaments.
A glance at some of the top players is fearsome right now:
Allison Fisher - the greatest women's nine ball player ever
Karen Corr - winner of about 25 WPBA titles
Kelly Fisher - #1 ranked in 2008
Ga Young Kim - two time world champion
Xiaoting Pan - world champion
Yu Ram Cha - beat Shane Van Boening at World 10-ball championships
Monica Webb - reigning National champion, began 2009 as #1
Jeanette Lee - former #1, holder of many WPBA titles
Vivian Villareal - former #1, holder of many WPBA titles
Gerda Hofstatter - world champion, former #2 ranked player
Jasmin Ouschan - proven superstar of both 9-ball and 14.1
Helena Thronfeldt - US Open champion, former #3 ranked player
Yes, it's downright scary how strong this tour has become at the top.
WPBA San Diego produced Webb, Lee, Hofstatter and Kim as its final four, while WPBA Michigan City produced four different players as its final four: Ouschan, Pan, Corr and K Fisher.
In the last nine WPBA events contested, Kelly Fisher, Allison Fisher, Monica Webb, and Jasmin Ouschan have each won twice, with Xiaoting Pan winning the other event. Yes, it's that competitive!
Given the talent at the top, why should we expect anything but major shakeups in the rankings and a fierce battle for #1.
Hence, my answer to the question that began this thread is "given the depth of the talent pool, #1 means as much as it ever has on the tour, but is harder than ever to defend."
Defending the #1 ranking has become extremely difficult because the depth of talent at the top has become so impressive. Just a few years ago, future hall of famers Allison Fisher and Karen Corr could, seemingly, be penciled into every WPBA Sunday, and between them they were winning most of the tournaments.
A glance at some of the top players is fearsome right now:
Allison Fisher - the greatest women's nine ball player ever
Karen Corr - winner of about 25 WPBA titles
Kelly Fisher - #1 ranked in 2008
Ga Young Kim - two time world champion
Xiaoting Pan - world champion
Yu Ram Cha - beat Shane Van Boening at World 10-ball championships
Monica Webb - reigning National champion, began 2009 as #1
Jeanette Lee - former #1, holder of many WPBA titles
Vivian Villareal - former #1, holder of many WPBA titles
Gerda Hofstatter - world champion, former #2 ranked player
Jasmin Ouschan - proven superstar of both 9-ball and 14.1
Helena Thronfeldt - US Open champion, former #3 ranked player
Yes, it's downright scary how strong this tour has become at the top.
WPBA San Diego produced Webb, Lee, Hofstatter and Kim as its final four, while WPBA Michigan City produced four different players as its final four: Ouschan, Pan, Corr and K Fisher.
In the last nine WPBA events contested, Kelly Fisher, Allison Fisher, Monica Webb, and Jasmin Ouschan have each won twice, with Xiaoting Pan winning the other event. Yes, it's that competitive!
Given the talent at the top, why should we expect anything but major shakeups in the rankings and a fierce battle for #1.
Hence, my answer to the question that began this thread is "given the depth of the talent pool, #1 means as much as it ever has on the tour, but is harder than ever to defend."
Last edited:
Actually, I think the changes are very good for the tour. The NFL has really grown since the idea of parity was developed. NASCAR has seen the same thing with an influx of young drivers who all have the potential to win on any weekend.
Better competition can only generate more fan interest.
Steve
Better competition can only generate more fan interest.
Steve
I guarantee you it means something to the person who is ranked #1! Just ask Monica if it means anything to her. Or Kelly Fisher, or Allison.