We do not have such a suggestion/discussion thread. The old thread became inactive but I believe it is time we have a new, fresh, and clean one.

Whenever you have an idea, thought, or something to say about the Suicide Game and Tour, insert it here.

I'll begin: Hantu ( DaniKim ) was caught deleting his posts after his pick lost. He has been suspended through the US Open, being able to return at Bali.

In the future, how should we handle such actions?

:yeah:

In my opinion, if someone edits a post before matches have started, they should get a warning for a first time offense, and some sort of small suspension after - a disqualification for the current tournament, and maybe a suspension for one or two tournaments after.

If someone deletes a post after their pick has lost and then posts a new one like Hantu, a three month suspension off the bat is appropriate, and a permamanent ban is sufficient for a repeat offense.

I think MH is pretty on the money concerning that issue. However, the suspensions he suggested for one or two tournaments, I say if you edit your post another time after, you should get a three month suspension, and then again, permanent ban.

And because I'm just a nerd, when I won Warsaw the final day had this neat winner/RU/SF line up going on, and then I saw that Cincy didn't have that (since the situations were so different), but when is the cut off for semifinalists? Is someone who made the final day but didn't have a pick a finalist or is that just the person who was in Day07 but had the wrong pick?

I think MH is pretty on the money concerning that issue. However, the suspensions he suggested for one or two tournaments, I say if you edit your post another time after, you should get a three month suspension, and then again, permanent ban.

And because I'm just a nerd, when I won Warsaw the final day had this neat winner/RU/SF line up going on, and then I saw that Cincy didn't have that (since the situations were so different), but when is the cut off for semifinalists? Is someone who made the final day but didn't have a pick a finalist or is that just the person who was in Day07 but had the wrong pick?

SF and Finalists are determined by who comes in 2nd, 3rd and 4th. Whenever those may be, whether it be on the final day, or Day 5, the finalist and semifinalist can be determined. Cincinnati can have semifinalists but I most likely did not determine them for the sake of it not being a ranking issue. For the US Open Series, semifinalists will be determined.

:yeah:

In my opinion, if someone edits a post before matches have started, they should get a warning for a first time offense, and some sort of small suspension after - a disqualification for the current tournament, and maybe a suspension for one or two tournaments after.

If someone deletes a post after their pick has lost and then posts a new one like Hantu, a three month suspension off the bat is appropriate, and a permamanent ban is sufficient for a repeat offense.


Couldn't agree with you more.
:yeah:

I think MH is pretty on the money concerning that issue. However, the suspensions he suggested for one or two tournaments, I say if you edit your post another time after, you should get a three month suspension, and then again, permanent ban.


I agree with this. We shouldn't be nice to people who cheat. You should get one warning and one warning only. After that you should get the automatic 3 month ban, then the perma ban if you get caught again.

I know this is a little early, but I also think we need to fix the ranking points to reflect the changes the WTA made to their ranking points. We could always wait the extra year though, seeing as the WTA is going to have to change their points again when they kill the tier system in 2009.

What about Suicide Doubles? I mean not 2 Suicide players together, but a tournament following the Doubles Draw .. I can run Both signles and doubles in my Luxembourg, I could do it in Koper a week earlier but I believe there will be few players

I know this is a little early, but I also think we need to fix the ranking points to reflect the changes the WTA made to their ranking points. We could always wait the extra year though, seeing as the WTA is going to have to change their points again when they kill the tier system in 2009.

I disagree. I feel the points are in an okay ratio. Unless everyone wants to reflect the WTA exactly, I feel that we should only bump the grand slams to the present total. The Tier IIIs and IVs are harder to win than the IIs and Is. The Tier I's are much easier to get to Day 7 and get the most points -- it should be the other way around. I think we should reward those who can succeed at the lower Tier's. Besides, 370 for a Tier I win is not far off from the 430 a Tier I champion gets in the WTA.

I disagree. I feel the points are in an okay ratio. Unless everyone wants to reflect the WTA exactly, I feel that we should only bump the grand slams to the present total. The Tier IIIs and IVs are harder to win than the IIs and Is. The Tier I's are much easier to get to Day 7 and get the most points -- it should be the other way around. I think we should reward those who can succeed at the lower Tier's. Besides, 370 for a Tier I win is not far off from the 430 a Tier I champion gets in the WTA.

Yes but we are going to have the change the points for 2009 anyways when the whole calender gets redone.

Yes but we are going to have the change the points for 2009 anyways when the whole calender gets redone.

So you suggest changing the points for 2008 or simply waiting for 2009?

So you suggest changing the points for 2008 or simply waiting for 2009?

I guess it makes more sense to just wait till 2009.

It's only easier to pick the TI events because it's almost a foregone conclusion who's going to win half the time. In the lower events "upsets" happen all the time. Although something needs to be done about Day04 winners in TIV events getting 24 points to a title. It's a cheap title and has no pizzazz to it. I was proud as hell to win Warsaw, I can't imagine the same could be said for the winner of Stockholm.

About changing the points system, how much different is it going to be? (Probably a stupid question but I don't really keep up with all the changes the WTA is making.) And without a semblance of tiers in the new schedule (as it seems,) is Stockholm going to be the same amount of points as Los Angeles now, since they aren't the top nine non-slam events? I don't know how MTF runs that deal, although I presume it'd be similar.

We technically could've changed the points for 2007, because the points we give out now are based on the WTA 2006 point distribution :shrug: We can leave it as is, again, for 2008... but I suppose with this roadmap business it may need to be revamped a bit.

What about Suicide Doubles? I mean not 2 Suicide players together, but a tournament following the Doubles Draw .. I can run Both signles and doubles in my Luxembourg, I could do it in Koper a week earlier but I believe there will be few players

We need to finalize rules for this potential Suicide doubles game. Any ideas? You seem very eager to have such a game. Come up with the foundation. :angel:

We need to finalize rules for this potential Suicide doubles game. Any ideas? You seem very eager to have such a game. Come up with the foundation. :angel:

Well, we need to make Ranking Points, And someone who could make the Rankings(:help:) I think it would be the "Game of Upsets" Because of Super-TB and There are also sometimes 1-2 Doubles Matches/Day so it will be very tough to win.

I was also thinking About Playing Suicide at 75K Denain for the one's who are out of USO Open after the 1st Week? ( Just Following TT :p)

I also wanted some clarification about BUs. Two people have complained about my choice of back-ups as they were the opponents of my main pick, and I was wondering if there was a specific rule on that? In The Zone said it was fine but I was wondering if that could be clarified in the rules or some mention was made either way, something.

I also wanted some clarification about BUs. Two people have complained about my choice of back-ups as they were the opponents of my main pick, and I was wondering if there was a specific rule on that? In The Zone said it was fine but I was wondering if that could be clarified in the rules or some mention was made either way, something.

I actually misinformed you. I thought I could have sworn an instance where someone withdrew and someone who took the opponent who received the walkover was given a victory. Apparently, this was not the case. If Hantuchova is playing Dementieva, and Hantuchova withdraws, the people who chose Dementieva as a pick will not count and their backup will be used. So as I know, you do your pick's opponent but now, this would not work. Sorry for the confusion. I could have sworn I saw this used but apparently I was wrong.

Walkovers do not count in any form. Whether it be for you or against you.

Wait, so...

if I had picked Dementieva for Day04, and my BU was Hantuchova, since Hantuchova retired my pick would be rendered obsolete? If that's the case, that makes no sense, Dementieva still won. It's like not counting her victory over Hantuchova as a real one. Now, if you meant that if someone chose Hantuchova and had Dementieva as a BU...then I'd understand.

I'm mildly confused.

Wait, so...

if I had picked Dementieva for Day04, and my BU was Hantuchova, since Hantuchova retired my pick would be rendered obsolete? If that's the case, that makes no sense, Dementieva still won. It's like not counting her victory over Hantuchova as a real one. Now, if you meant that if someone chose Hantuchova and had Dementieva as a BU...then I'd understand.

I'm mildly confused.

Retirements do count as completed matches, your BU is used ONLY if a player withdraws from the tournament OR gives a WO. You're through to day 5 with Dementieva. Though you're BU pick was wrong, since in case of a WO, you'd be put without a pick ;) Dementieva-Hantuchova match picks wouldnt count at all

I would like to see Suicide FED CUP. Any ideas on how to run it? The old setup for Suicide Fed Cup was not successful.

I would like to see Suicide FED CUP. Any ideas on how to run it? The old setup for Suicide Fed Cup was not successful.

How was it before? I think an amount of players must represent the countries, and the Captain must make a pick in colaboration with the team, and if the pick of a team is wrong, they lose :shrug:

What about something like...

A certain amount of countries having a Fed Cup Squad (like 4 players) and each player PMing 1 player each day from the Fed Cup OOP... and whichever team has the most survivors moves on to the next round (or better TB if the case may be) :shrug:

What about something like...

A certain amount of countries having a Fed Cup Squad (like 4 players) and each player PMing 1 player each day from the Fed Cup OOP... and whichever team has the most survivors moves on to the next round (or better TB if the case may be) :shrug:

The problem with that is you will very likely end up with a lot of ties. We could also do it like real fed cup style in that you are scheduled to face a certain player. Say Canada VS USA

Me and you are scheduled as the first singles match for our respective countries. We would each have to send a PM to the manager of the fed cup thread.

Now I was thinking we could do this in one of two ways. The first being, the manager of fed cup will pick 5 matches that each player would have to make a pick from. The manager will also chose in which order the picks will be used.

For example:
1) Dani vs Kim
2) Venus vs Patty
3) Maria vs Peng
4) Serena vs Martina
5) Nadia vs Na

So each player must pick a winner for each match. The way the winner of the match will be decided will be whoever survives the longest. If we both get match one correct, we go to match 2, if I picked wrong and died, and you correctly picked you would win the tie for USA even if the rest of your picks were wrong.

The second option would be, instead of having the manager pick 5 matches, each player could chose their own 5 matches and PM the manager in the order in which they want to be used.

I have a question!

When you count up total games lost, do the matches lost count towards their total?

Example:

2 players left, both lose on day 6
before day 6:
Player A: 20 games lost
Player B: 25 games lost

Day 06:
Player A: player loses, loses 18 games
Player B: player loses, loses 12 games

New totals:
Player A: 38
Player B: 37

If the games lost from match lost counts, Player B would win. IF you don't ocunt the match lost towards game total, Player A would win.

:shrug:

I have a question!

When you count up total games lost, do the matches lost count towards their total?

Example:

2 players left, both lose on day 6
before day 6:
Player A: 20 games lost
Player B: 25 games lost

Day 06:
Player A: player loses, loses 18 games
Player B: player loses, loses 12 games

New totals:
Player A: 38
Player B: 37

If the games lost from match lost counts, Player B would win. IF you don't ocunt the match lost towards game total, Player A would win.

:shrug:
Yes unfortunately they do count. I still think this rule is terrible, because player A made a closer match then player B, yet the person that picked player B wins.

Yes unfortunately they do count. I still think this rule is terrible, because player A made a closer match then player B, yet the person that picked player B wins.

When something similar happened at Palermo, when everyone lost Day 1, I used my own discretion and gave runnerup to the most who WON the most games because only one person made Day 2 and I needed a runnerup. Someone picking someone who loses 6-0, 6-0 shouldn't get it over someone who loses 6-7, 7-6, 7-6. I think this rule needs to be changed where if a losing pick needs to be counted to determine a winner, these matches do not count but only if tied after the other picks. From there, whoever won more games wins.

Yes unfortunately they do count. I still think this rule is terrible, because player A made a closer match then player B, yet the person that picked player B wins.

My biggest problem with the rule is when someone doesn't make a pick.

Player A and B are the only 2 left on DAY03... so Player A picks a player and she loses 12 games. player B fails to make a pick, so he oges down as losing 0? Is it right that he would still have fewer games lost? or does he lose because he didn't make a pick?

My biggest problem with the rule is when someone doesn't make a pick.

Player A and B are the only 2 left on DAY03... so Player A picks a player and she loses 12 games. player B fails to make a pick, so he oges down as losing 0? Is it right that he would still have fewer games lost? or does he lose because he didn't make a pick?

He would lose for making no such pick.

Guyz, I have a problem .. Chris84 and HenryMag have made the same picks throughout the whole week, there are 2 dif in their BUs .. I haevnt really followed the discussions ehre during the last months, so I count the nr of games lost by BU Picks or the one who posted 1st wins? :shrug:

I wrote by using BU Games lost, cause HenryMag wins with both rules ;)

Use who has posted their pick first. The backup rule wasn't put into effect.

I'm doing the RPD now, but I have a problem .. Chris_84 and HenryMag had picks on day6 but I didnt, but we are supposed to get same points .. what about making a change in the R Ps to make day6(with pick) and just day 6?

In the event that there are atleast 12 people and no one reaches DAY 07,

2nd Place - 67
1st Place - 95

Or I use this :shrug: but I didnt have 12 players

Or I use this :shrug: but I didnt have 12 players

Because you did not have 12 players, then they are awarded Day 6 Invalid points but HenryMag is awarded the title. They both receive the same amount of points but HenryMag is champion.

Me, HentryMag and Chris_84 all get same points for day 6 invalid, yes?

Me, HentryMag and Chris_84 all get same points for day 6 invalid, yes?

Yes. With less than 12 players, you earn whatever day you earn.

http://wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=11700662&postcount=133

We must disqualify this? :confused: I think it'd be unfair

No. It's fine. He did it fast enough where there wasn't even an edited time. It was not plotted or malicious. And it doesn't matter anyway .. Krajicek is his backup which is what would be used -- and he kept Krajicek as his main pick. No big deal.

ok ;)

Sorry 2 B annoying but it's the 1st tournament with seedings Im running so if a seed fails to make a pick on day2 is he replaced by the next one 2 be seeded? :scratch:

Sorry 2 B annoying but it's the 1st tournament with seedings Im running so if a seed fails to make a pick on day2 is he replaced by the next one 2 be seeded? :scratch:

yup, if a seeded player doesn`t enter the event the next player to be seeded gets bumped up.

K thnx ;)

Soooo, question.

LudwigDvorak picks Poutchek (BU: Govortsova) thinking that Poutchek won. She didn't. He re-posts a pick with Cibulkova (BU: Govortsova). Am I supposed to take Govortsova or can I take Cibulkova?

Soooo, question.

LudwigDvorak picks Poutchek (BU: Govortsova) thinking that Poutchek won. She didn't. He re-posts a pick with Cibulkova (BU: Govortsova). Am I supposed to take Govortsova or can I take Cibulkova?

I would take Govortsova. That's the whole point of a backup. And he may have changed his pick seeing what other people did.

I would take Govortsova. That's the whole point of a backup. And he may have changed his pick seeing what other people did.

He told me that he took Cibulkova because he was choosing the winner of Poutchek/Cibulkova over Song. Since Poutchek did not win, he wanted Cibulkova. This makes sense and is probably the only situation where a backup would not be used. But people do need to read the OOP more carefully and with more a strict manager, the backup can be used. In this circumstance, it's alright.

To all Suicide players,

I will be unable to continue to use WTAWorld for the time being. My life is being taken away from me. I can't get into details but work, school -- everything is gone. Until further notice, I am inactive and I cannot help. I will not be seen on WTAWorld for quite some time ( if you do see me, it's not real ).

I'm sorry for everyone that this affects in a bad way. I know I had promises and obligations and contributions to help this game.

Everything is out of my hands.

I'm sorry,
ITZ

Paul :sad: Hope everything is okay! :hug:

I actually want a little change in the rankings.
Let's make it the same as the WTA rankings.
For Suicide YEC was an EXTRA tournament.
The people who didn't play YEC has 10 tournament + 6 mandatory.
The 8 that plays YEC has 17 tournaments.
The WTA has 11 best results for the people who don't play YEC.

Another difference is the tournaments that are mandatory.
Suicide has Indian Wells as mandatory and the WTA hasn't.
I'm not sure how the WTA has it in 2008.

Are all of you ok with my suggestion?

Yes.

From 2009 there will be some more mandatory tournaments, Beijing, Madrid and sth else ..

Yes.

From 2009 there will be some more mandatory tournaments, Beijing, Madrid and sth else ..

But not in 2008? Maybe Indian Wells now....

But not in 2008? Maybe Indian Wells now....

I doubt it's from 2008 :shrug:

I actually want a little change in the rankings.
Let's make it the same as the WTA rankings.
For Suicide YEC was an EXTRA tournament.
The people who didn't play YEC has 10 tournament + 6 mandatory.
The 8 that plays YEC has 17 tournaments.
The WTA has 11 best results for the people who don't play YEC.

Another difference is the tournaments that are mandatory.
Suicide has Indian Wells as mandatory and the WTA hasn't.
I'm not sure how the WTA has it in 2008.

Are all of you ok with my suggestion?

Interesting. So currently, the players from 06 YEC have an extra tournament on everyone? If this is true, it really should be a 7th mandatory and they only get 10 best while non-YECers get Best 11 tournaments.

As for Indian Wells, I think it's mandatory next year.

Keep IW mandatory IMO and as for the YECs - I like the idea that it's a bonus tournament for those who were good enough to get in, but I can see the problem with that too and wouldn't care if it's part of the Best 10 instead.

Keep IW mandatory, it`s going to be that way soon enough anyways, YEC should be manadtory for all who play it, and everyone else should get 11 best.

What if I make the YECs, get 72 points, but have a 10th or 11th tournament of 162 points - will the YECs just not count on my ranking then? I don't think it should be mandatory, and then limit our best 10 to 9 because of that...

Making the rankings for Moscow/Bangkok, I got the following situation:


e) Tier III - Gold Coast, Memphis, Bogota, Acapulco, Strasbourg, Istanbul, Birmingham, 's-Hertogenbosch, Cincinatti, Kolkata, Guangzhou, Tokyo [Japan Open], Bangkok, Hasselt, Quebec City



DAY 01 - 1
DAY 02 - 9
DAY 03 - 18
DAY 04 - 30
DAY 05 - 49
DAY 06 - 100
DAY 07 - 125
DAY 07 - 138 (WITH PICK)
WINNING - 150

In the event that there are atleast 12 people and no one reaches DAY 07,

2nd Place - 85
1st Place - 120



4. If the tournament lasts 6 days, then DAY 05 will be cut out, and those who reach that far will immediately qualify in receiving points equivalent to DAY 06. As a results, the "new" DAY 05, will be equal to the "old" points of DAY 06.


In Bangkok there were at least 12 people. A few made day 5 and no one reached day 6.
As mentioned above. With 6 days, day 5 will be cut and you get the day 6 points.
So everyone on day 5 gets 100 points.
No I still don't see a point in the 1st/2nd place.
2nd place is 85 points, which is LESS than 100 points.
That just doesn't make sense at all.
How many points should I give now?

Making the rankings for Moscow/Bangkok, I got the following situation:


e) Tier III - Gold Coast, Memphis, Bogota, Acapulco, Strasbourg, Istanbul, Birmingham, 's-Hertogenbosch, Cincinatti, Kolkata, Guangzhou, Tokyo [Japan Open], Bangkok, Hasselt, Quebec City



DAY 01 - 1
DAY 02 - 9
DAY 03 - 18
DAY 04 - 30
DAY 05 - 49
DAY 06 - 100
DAY 07 - 125
DAY 07 - 138 (WITH PICK)
WINNING - 150

In the event that there are atleast 12 people and no one reaches DAY 07,

2nd Place - 85
1st Place - 120






In Bangkok there were at least 12 people. A few made day 5 and no one reached day 6.
As mentioned above. With 6 days, day 5 will be cut and you get the day 6 points.
So everyone on day 5 gets 100 points.
No I still don't see a point in the 1st/2nd place.
2nd place is 85 points, which is LESS than 100 points.
That just doesn't make sense at all.
How many points should I give now?

In the past, we have disregarded the 2nd place points if the 2nd place person has surpassed it. I'll try and find a situation like that from the past to show you. If second place earns more than 85, then they get those points and 2nd place is not awarded.

And Bangkok was a 6 day event? I could have sworn it was 7.

Yep. Just checked, Bangkok was a 7 day event. So 2nd place should be awarded.

I actually want a little change in the rankings.
Let's make it the same as the WTA rankings.
For Suicide YEC was an EXTRA tournament.
The people who didn't play YEC has 10 tournament + 6 mandatory.
The 8 that plays YEC has 17 tournaments.
The WTA has 11 best results for the people who don't play YEC.

Another difference is the tournaments that are mandatory.
Suicide has Indian Wells as mandatory and the WTA hasn't.
I'm not sure how the WTA has it in 2008.

Are all of you ok with my suggestion?

You mean to tell me everyone's rankings only include 16 tournaments? I think we should add that 17th during the offseason.

In the past, we have disregarded the 2nd place points if the 2nd place person has surpassed it. I'll try and find a situation like that from the past to show you. If second place earns more than 85, then they get those points and 2nd place is not awarded.

And Bangkok was a 6 day event? I could have sworn it was 7.

It's 7 days, but the tournament manager made it 6.
I think that the 2 round was 1 day instead of 2.

More points for P2 or just remove it at all (which I like better).

It's 7 days, but the tournament manager made it 6.
I think that the 2 round was 1 day instead of 2.

More points for P2 or just remove it at all (which I like better).

I see 5 days. Someone picked Peer on Day 5 -- and she lost in the QF so there were obviously two days remaining. I would do the points as a 7 day event.

I see 5 days. Someone picked Peer on Day 5 -- and she lost in the QF so there were obviously two days remaining. I would do the points as a 7 day event.

I thought it was SF, but now it's indeed QF. In that case it's 49 points.
Now I don't know why the manager has 6 days in the 1st post while it's 7 days.
It only makes it confusing.

Rankings will be finished tomorrow then.

I thought it was SF, but now it's indeed QF. In that case it's 49 points.
Now I don't know why the manager has 6 days in the 1st post while it's 7 days.
It only makes it confusing.

Rankings will be finished tomorrow then.

Don't worry about it. There won't be a change from 1-8 ( I think ) so the seeds know who they are. If anything changes, tough noogies. :) I'll do the entry list when Day 1 is finished.

I HATE the whole if 12 people enter thing you can award 1st and 2nd place points if no one reached day 7. I honestly think we should cut that next year, and you get the points you earned. So if everyone goes out on day 1, you all get 1 point.

As of now, the rankings are 6 mandatories + Best 10 results + YEC to equal 17 tournaments. To end 2007, this is perfectly fine.

However, for the beginning of 2008, before Gold Coast and Auckland -- Sjoerd, do you think it's possible to make it Best 11 Results and add the YEC not as a mandatory, but as an extra result? It's ridiculous and unfair that some people have 17 tournament ranking while everyone else has 16. The YEC is an extra tournament for the Best 11 -- not a mandatory.

Luckily, the top 8 who were in the YEC are the top 8 in the rankings so it doesn't mean anything. But to begin 2008, these changes would be fair for everyone.

Of course I can make the rankings like that. No problem.
The season is over now so we can talk about 2008.
I want to have all things clear when the new season starts.

Who's updating the rules? Who can decide which rules will be changed or not?
I'd like to see some changes. Is there one or more people who can accept the changes or decline them?

I have the following in mind:

Before the first tournament starts, we need to post the rules what counts for all tournaments. All managers has to post the same rules and not copy it just from last years thread which can have other rules.
1. You can't edit or delete picks. If you edit your pick it will be invalid. It's not that you get disqualified for the whole tournament, you just get the points of that day.
2. Playing more than 1 tournament means ZERO points for that week.
3. If you commit, but don't post a pick on time then you get ZERO points. That also counts for seeds who receives a bye at day 1 but don't post for day 2. In that case the first unseeded player will be a seed and receives the bye.
Then I also prefer to delete the players who commit but didn't send a pick at all.
4. For the managers. This year I've seen there are some mistakes in the final results. Please check ones again if the results are correct.
If I have to do that as well, then you better can let me run the tournament. So please check if the results are correct and then PM them to me. It will be easier then for me to do the rankings, instead of checking if the manager did his job.
5. Deciding the winner of a tournament. The player who lost the less games wins. That's fine of course. But seeds gets 0 games at day 1.
Now I suggest that also the seeds have a pick for day 1. Of course they receive a bye and can choose that player later in the tournament.
The day 1 pick only counts for deciding the winner.
So what happens if they forget to pick a player?
Then this person gets the games of the player that lost the most games at day 1.
6. Removing the: 'if at least 12 players, then 1st and 2nd place points' rule. I really don't like it and it's more confusing than good.
7. Which tournaments should be mandatory. Now we have 4 slams, IW, Miami and YEC. We need more/less? Like In The Zone said, the top 8 can't have an advantage to have another tournament which counts.
YEC counts only for 8 players and the rest gets another result instead of that.

I guess that's about it now.

During the offseason, I will re-write the rules and clarify them as well as updating them with the rules we have added as the game has progressed. I'll then post them for everyone to modify, comment, etc before 2008 begins.

I agree with most of your points but not 5, 6, and 7. # 5 because the rankings have to mean something. If you look at the results, seeds winning the tournaments are VERY rare and there are ways to beat them with the games tiebreaker. Without byes and the games tiebreaker being smaller, the rankings would mean nothing. In TT, the rankings decide entry, seeds, and draws. In PAW, rankings decide entry. In FITD, there are rankings but they mean nothing -- and the game is a little less meaningful too. We have to give our rankings some credibility and keep it like the WTA Tour in this respect.

For # 6, the 12 person rule does not come into effect at Tier II and Is, obviously. For Tier IIIs and IVs, I think it takes more skill to win those than it does in Tier I and IIs -- and ironically, the points are less even though they are tougher! The 12 person rule at least gives people 120 or 95 pts when compared to an easy Tier II or I where everyone can get to Day 6 or 7 with ease. The 12 person rule gives our lower tiers some meaning. Without them, even less players will play them.

For #7, I understand what you mean but the YEC should not be mandatory in anyone's ranking. For example, for the top 8, it should only be included if the YEC amount is in their best 11 ( now 11, not 10 ). If it's not, it's an extra tournament -- just like the WTA Tour. Jankovic's 105 this year did not even count in her ranking because of her 17 tournaments and it fell outside the 17. The YEC should only be included if it's high enough.

The rules are made by a consensus. Like posting in this thread, btw. :)

LOL, I didn't know Jankovic's YEC debacle didn't get counted. That's pretty funny. ;)

I thought we were going to change the tiebreak rules. I vote that it should come down to the final pick first, e.g. if A picks Jankovic who loses 2-6 7-5 6-7 to Henin, and B picks Serena Williams who loses, oh, I don't know, 1-6 2-6 to Laura Granville :), then A should be the winner.

If both pick the same person, then their entire picking history should be considered, and it should be fewest sets lost, then fewest games lost, as has been previously discussed.

Discuss.

LOL, I didn't know Jankovic's YEC debacle didn't get counted. That's pretty funny. ;)

I thought we were going to change the tiebreak rules. I vote that it should come down to the final pick first, e.g. if A picks Jankovic who loses 2-6 7-5 6-7 to Henin, and B picks Serena Williams who loses, oh, I don't know, 1-6 2-6 to Laura Granville :), then A should be the winner.

If both pick the same person, then their entire picking history should be considered, and it should be fewest sets lost, then fewest games lost, as has been previously discussed.

Discuss.

i agree with that:D

Fewest sets, then fewest games. ( Albeit it is rare that the sets comes into play, but to have it noted this way is important. )

Yes yes ;) all well and good, but what about the final pick thing? What do people think?

Yes yes ;) all well and good, but what about the final pick thing? What do people think?

You mean if Player A picks Jankovic and Player B picks Serena?
Jankovic loses 67 76 76 and Serena loses 61 62?

On the last day, if all picks are losing, I think it's fair to say that the one who was closer to winning the match should be the rightful winner.

So tie break would now be,
1)If different wrong picks made on last day of remaining players, winner is determined by most games won by the losing pick.
2)Less sets lost during the week
3)Less games lost during the week
4)Person who posted pick first

I still think we need to get rid of the if 12 players play and no one reaches day 7 points.
In the Zone, your argument is that it protects the level of the tier 3 and 4, but I think its silly to give someone making it to day 3 of a tier 4 more points then someone who makes it to day 2 of a tier 1.

I still think we need to get rid of the if 12 players play and no one reaches day 7 points.
In the Zone, your argument is that it protects the level of the tier 3 and 4, but I think its silly to give someone making it to day 3 of a tier 4 more points then someone who makes it to day 2 of a tier 1.

Because making it to a Day 2 of a Tier I doesn't require much skill or difficulty.

Since more than one person seems to be against this, I don't see strong enough reason to NOT take away the points.

In 2008, unless there are objections, we can get rid of the 12 person/7 Day rule.

Because making it to a Day 2 of a Tier I doesn't require much skill or difficulty.

Since more than one person seems to be against this, I don't see strong enough reason to NOT take away the points.

In 2008, unless there are objections, we can get rid of the 12 person/7 Day rule.

Well, admittedly, day 2 can be tough because you get like, 3 matches to pick from on day 1 :p but I do agree that the 12 people rule provides more incentive to participate in a Tier III/IV. *shrug*

So tie break would now be,
1)If different wrong picks made on last day of remaining players, winner is determined by most games won by the losing pick.
2)Less sets lost during the week
3)Less games lost during the week
4)Person who posted pick first

Basically, yes. Again, I would say that sets > games in 1) as well.

Canuck's tiebreak rules are perfect. Now that we can formally state it, this is great. :)

Let's keep up with the rules changes/modifications. We're doing a good job so far!

Because the offseason has been a little boring, I am going to run Suicide at the 75K in Dubai! It will only be for fun. But come play and enjoy! :D!!

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d128/pimppauly/SuicideTennis.jpg

Remember, every choice, whether good or bad, can be deadly...

Suicide 75K Dubai 2007

1. Each day of play, you must pick 1 winner playing a WTA main draw singles match. (READ: DO NOT PICK A MATCH FROM THE QUALIFYING DRAW!). Of course, the player that you choose, is playing one match scheduled to be played that day (as seen on the order of play).

2. Once you pick someone, you cannot choose them again for the rest of the tournament. If you choose Justine Henin early in a tournament on clay, you will not be able to use her in the semifinal or final. Hence the point of Suicide.

3. You must choose one player to win each day. If you forget, are sick, or are unable to reach a computer, it will be treated as a wrong pick, and you will be out of the tournament. As well, your pick must be chosen before the pick's match has commenced, otherwise it will be considered a wrong pick, and thus you will again, be out of the tournament.

4. Only in the case of a walkover, or a withdrawal, each player is allowed to have a back-up pick, selected at the same time as their initial pick. That back-up pick will only be used in the occurence of a walkover or withdrawal, as stated above. Retirements do count as completed matches.

Replacement picks must be identitified like this:

BACK-UP PICK - TATIANA GOLOVIN

If it is not clearly identitified, then both picks will be declared invalid.

5. The top 8 ranked entrants will receive a BYE in a Tier I/II tournament. In a Slam and Tier III/IV tournament, no byes are granted.

6. To sign up, please type the word "In". It is not mandatory to commit or enter before Day 01. If you do not post a Day 01 pick, you will not be listed on the entry list. Your entry is confirmed when your Day 01 pick is posted.

7. Please be advised that you may only play ONE Suicide Tennis tournament per week. If you play in multiple tournaments per week, you will be given a score of ZERO for the week to go into your ranking.

8. Once your pick is posted, that pick is final and may not be changed. Please make sure you are confident in your pick before posting it. If you edit your pick, your pick will be null and void and you will be out on that given day.
If you delete your pick, you are disqualified from the tournament.


Ranking Points for INSERT TOURNAMENT NAME HERE, TIER #
[ Insert Points Table here ].

Further Information

Time in Dubai Use this (http://www.worldtimeserver.com/)

Suicide Tennis Introduction and Rules - Please click this (http://wtaworld.com/showthread.php?p=7160848#post7160848)

Suicide Tennis Rankings - Please click this (http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=284396)

** IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE AWAY FROM THE COMPUTER/WTAWORLD IS BEING SLOW AND ANNOYING, YOU MAY E-MAIL ME YOUR PICKS AT pimppaui@aol.com

I reworded a few things in the rules. Anything I should add? What does everyone think?

At minimum how many players must to play on a tourney? In Tashkent I have only 3 players...:sad:

Thx...:)

At minimum how many players must to play on a tourney? In Tashkent I have only 3 players...:sad:

Thx...:)

Since the amount of points a person earns is dependent only on their results, having a 3 person tournament is fine. :)