Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Demon
The point of the LTR isn't to keep the top seeds at the top, it's to see who's the best player and who's done the best in the tournaments overall.
|
Absolutely right. And at the moment, it appears that the best players in tournaments overall are Sniper, myself and machiavelli. So in order to continue to find out whether they are really the best, they should not be knocking each other out in round 1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Demon
When it's teams, planting the top seeds against the worse seeded teams means that nobody can ever really change where they stand in the LTR, because it's most likely that there won't be 3 high quality lower seeded players on the same team.
|
Would you suggest having Federer playing Nadal in the first round of Wimbledon, so all the other players have a chance of overtaking one of them in the world rankings?
The point of rankings is that the best players rise to the top. They can't do that if they are playing each other all the time while the weaker players get more points than them because they're playing other weaker players. If Federer played Nadal in round 1 of every tournament this year, odds are that someone else would be world number 1 by the end of it, because they would both have half the number of points they'd expect to have. In other words, the two best players in the world wouldn't be number 1 in the rankings. That makes a mockery of the rankings themselves.
If your argument were valid there would be no such thing as seedings in major sporting events. Funnily enough, pretty much every single sporting event does in fact have seedings. Maybe that should tell you something about your argument.