MARTINA AT THE TOP, EXCEPT IN SLAMS

Rankings: There must be a better way

By Sandra Harwitt
tennisreporters.net

Susan Mullane Camerawork USA, Inc.

Does the women's ranking system work?

Actually, the better question might be is there any ranking system that would ever really work?

None of these are new questions – the ranking system for both the men and the women have been questioned since I've been around the game. No, I think I'll leave the exact date on that out of this commentary since I'll only admit to 21+.

At issue at the moment is whether Martina Hingis is really the No. 1 ranked player in the world or is she just perched in that place because of how the system works.

One person who refuted the No. 1 distinction was Hingis, herself, at the recent French Open, after losing to Jennifer Capriati for the second consecutive Grand Slam – Capriati beat her in the Australian Open Finland the French Open semifinals, as well as in the Charleston final this spring. Actually, the two were on tap for a semifinal outing at Wimbledon, but Hingis's back got in the way and she lost to Virginia Ruano Pascual in the first round on the opening day.

The reasoning that Hingis remains at the top despite having not won a major title since the Australian Open in 1999 is that the current ranking system "rewards players for quantity instead of quality" according to Martina Navratilova, commentating the Hingis upset for TNT on Monday. That's pretty much the lowdown on the situation, although it does take a little bit more than quantity – besides playing a lot of tournaments, you have to consistently go far in each event to stay at the top.

And that's basically what Hingis did last year.

In 2000, Hingis won nine titles, including the season-ending Chase Championships, a victory she said at the time gave credence to her top billing. She also was a finalist at four tournaments, including the Australian Open, and a semifinalist at five events, including the French and U.S. Opens.

But is that volume, as weighty as it seems, enough to have crowned her No. 1 over Venus Williams, who won her first two career Grand Slam trophies at Wimbledon and U.S. Opens. If majors are the major achievement in the game and Williams won two in 2000 and Hingis won none, shouldn't that have rightly given Williams the edge for last year.

ATP CHAMPIONSRACE ALSO CONFUSING
The women aren't alone in this controversy.

Last year the men started a system called the ATP ChampionsRace, which identifies the players in terms of how they stand for the particular year at hand. Nevertheless, it's not that simple because the ATP also utilizes the ATP Entry System (a new name that is synonymous with rankings) to fill-out tournament main draws and decide on seedings. If you think this makes it easier for the public to follow, it doesn't. The truth is much of the international media just refer to the ATP Entry System's determination as a players ranking and that's that.

I'm not sure what the answer is to the ongoing ranking controversy but it does seem clear that no one has found it yet. What I am sure of is that it would becomingly agreed to there must be a better way.

If anyone out there has a suggestion, send it along to harwitt@tennisreporters.net.