A player’s rating is a number (of points) which
represents his/her playing ability relative to other rated players and the competition
they have participated in over the last two years. A player’s rating changes by
varying amounts depending upon the rating difference between his/her rating, the rating of
his/her opponent and the event they are participating in.
There is a difference between ratings and rankings. Ratings are quantity
driven, while rankings are quality driven.
The difference is explained below.
New Zealand Table Tennis Association Ratings
Available here.
TTNZ has developed a new ratings system which will be trialed during
2009.
RATINGS VS RANKINGS
What's the difference? Why two systems?
Good questions. The answer to the first is that ratings are quantity
driven. The more events one plays in, the greater the opportunities to accumulate points
and improve one's position. Rankings on the other hand are quality driven. Once a player
has qualified for ranking by playing in the required number of events, the performances
are assessed by a panel and a ranking position is allocated.
There are guidelines for rankings in our Handbook. The salient points of
interest to players being:
The rankings shall be based on performances both in New Zealand and
overseas in a season of tournament play and representative contests.
To qualify for a New Zealand ranking, players must participate in a
minimum of four rating events in any particular category, excluding B & C Grade events
(AGM 3.3.90). Allowance is made for players unable to compete in rating tournaments whilst
they are representing New Zealand. The 1994 AGM granted the then Management Committee the
discretion to rank players who, because of overseas playing commitments, would not
otherwise qualify for a ranking.
Where records of individuals are equal, the player with a better
performance in matches of best of 5 games shall be entitled to the higher ranking.
Cognizance shall also be taken of the number of winning performances in
tournaments and also of winning results in semi-finals.
Overseas players shall not be considered for ranking unless they have
been resident in New Zealand for a period of not less than three months.
The accuracy of the list is often questioned but it needs to be remembered
that rankings reflect the opinion of a panel. This principle of basing decisions on a
panel's opinion is little different from the policy adopted by a selection panel for team
selection.
The answer to the second question, why two systems, revolves around the
fact that ratings are still not accepted as an accurate reflection of the relative merits
of players, based on their performance within their age-group. There are several reasons
for this. The ratings are influenced by the previous year's performances; there are better
opportunities to accumulate points in some areas of the country than in others; and there
is only one overall list, rather than a separately calculated list for each age-group.
In short, the rankings are a manually prepared list and must necessarily
be limited to a short list of names; the ratings are computer-produced which enables a
much larger number of players to be included.
Source: An edited version of an article written by Ron Menchi, Table
Tennis Info Magazine, November 1996
|
