Talk:Tennis at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Qualification

continental qualifiers who rank in the top 56

Page 3 of the qualifying document says, "Athletes who achieve both a Continental Games qualification place and, subsequently, a Direct Acceptance ranking, will qualify using the Continental Qualification quota place)" This is very clear. If there is some sourced document that declares otherwise please indicate instead just re-adding over and over again.18abruce (talk) 19:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And the reallocation rules, on page 6 say, "reallocated to the next highest placed athlete in the respective tournament."18abruce (talk) 19:57, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The host section says, "if the Host Nation does not have a representative via Direct Acceptance or through a Final Qualification Place (ITF place) above, its highest ranked athlete based on the Singles Rankings of 7 June 2021 shall qualify." It specifically, and only, addresses the highest ranked host athlete. It does not provide for up to four. And if unused, is to be allocated to the next highest ranking athlete on the singles rankings.18abruce (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Either way if both Q. Wang and Podoroska have actually directly entered into the main draw despite they are inside the top 50 and will take away their continental ranking spots to the highest ranking continental player, the possible replacements will be María Camila Osorio Serrano (world no. 94) and Ankita Raina (world no. 180) as representing continental places. ApprenticeWiki work 22:23, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read the source, I quoted the relevant part above. The continental qualification comes first so the quota will not pass to those other two. The only way for those continental spots to get passed on is for Wang or Podoroska to withdraw.18abruce (talk) 22:52, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If by some chance either do withdraw the replacements would be Zhang Shuai for Wang, and Carolina Meligeni Alves for Podoraska. I encourage you to read the qualification rules here before discussing further.18abruce (talk) 23:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well they do pass on in a way, since they still need 64 participants one way or another. As continental qualification clearly has precedence, if a player with a continental spot would otherwise also be eligible for a direct entry that direct entry is passed on to the next eligible player on the world ranking (the continental spot thus doesn't pass on to an other player).T v x1 15:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kaia Kanepi is eligible for Olympic Games

Hello, Estonian media reported in October 2020 that Kaia Kanepi has been granted permission by the ITF to participate in Tokyo despite not fulfilling the Fed Cup requirement. https://tennisnet.ee/kaia-kanepi-sai-itf-ilt-oiguse-voistelda-olumpiamangudel/

Thank you, that has been fixed.18abruce (talk) 19:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Murray

Why is Andy Murray ranked 3rd? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.32.66.159 (talk) 12:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

it is because of his protected ranking from injury I believe. However, I will remove him shortly, and others, if a source validating this does not show up soon, @ApprenticeFan:.18abruce (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And looking into it further, I find it doubtful that it is accurate since he is not using a protected ranking for Wimbledon, and eurosport is inferring that he will take the legacy quota.18abruce (talk) 20:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And Kevin Anderson had to get into the French Open as an alternate but he is going to be 14 for the Olympics because of a protected ranking? These tables are a mess.18abruce (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over 3,5 years since Murray was last ranked 3rd. I strongly doubt he still has a right to a Protected Ranking based on that.T v x1 18:49, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The rumors are true. Murray got a direct entry into the Olympics with a protected ranking of 2. Source: Twitter LTA Your @TeamGB & @ParalympicsGB line-up ApprenticeWiki work 13:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That only confirms he is entered, not that he used a PR. He was entered as a legacy gold medallist.T v x1 02:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unsourced issues

there are several players listed as ineligible without any source, maybe it is true but needs to be fixed: Men's Sebastian Korda says not eligible but this article thinks he is likely to go, Laslo Đere injured or withdrew but I have no idea why, Nick Kyrgios probably out with injury but has he actually withdrawn, Aljaž Bedene says not eligible, Kyle Edmund very unlikely to play but has he withdrawn? The lone Protected Ranking (Lu) seems to be confirmed since that is how he is entered in Wimbledon, but that is a little weak for evidence.18abruce (talk) 01:34, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the women's side we have: Petra Martić says ineligible but others proved to not be true, Paula Badosa not idea whether true or not, Dayana Yastremska could use a source that indicates how long her suspension is for but likely true, Patricia Maria Țig, Polona Hercog.18abruce (talk) 01:46, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry for what I had done in the past couple of days before the 14 June 2021 rankings have been released. Sources are to be reliable is needed to any editors if Martic, Badosa, Tig or Hercog could be named and give a permission from its NOCs as I don't really give a bullshit and let the Wiki Gods to claim the sporting governing bodies. So fucking damn edits on the qualification process. Wait for official sources if Yastremska could win an appeal on the doping ban to forgo.

Sources for Yastremska's court appeal: [1], [2]

As for Aslan Karatsev, Tommy Paul, Elena Rybakina and Kaia Kanepi, they received a permission from a respective National Olympic Committees to give special dispensation status and requirements from Davis Cup and Fed Cup (nowadays called Billie Jean King Cup, or in initials BJK Cup) as they never participated any Davis Cup or Fed Cup tournaments from 2016 to 2020, but Karatsev participated Davis Cup once in 2015.

As for Kyrgios, his option is to stay in Australia amid the COVID-19 pandemic in the country to avoid COVID-19 PCR testing and is stuck in the country despite the country's borders have already closed to non-residents (foreign travelers) since 20 March 2020. Edmund has chosen not to participate despite with injury issues, or if Stan Wawrinka could choose to withdraw next, also due to injury on right foot issues since March 2021.

In addition to the comments up above, Aljaž Bedene represented Great Britain from 2015–17 as he was deemed ineligible to compete in the 2016 Summer Olympics, thus failed to appeal his representation over Team GB in Davis Cup. The Slovenia Davis Cup team does not recognize Bedene and his participation over the years, thus making ineligible. As for Lorenzo Musetti, Marcos Giron and Carlos Alcaraz, they do not meet with Davis Cup requirements from 2017–21 as they never participated in previous Davis Cups. Their rankings were outisde of top 100 at the start of 2020. Likewise, Pablo Andújar was also deemed ineligible being sidelined with injuries from 2016 to 2017. ApprenticeWiki work 02:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of information, can you provide evidence of permission from NOCs for Karatsev, Paul, or Rybakina. Evidence is needed for Kyrgios, Edmund, and Wawrinka. Where does your knowledge come from? How do you know these things to be true?18abruce (talk) 02:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify this, they granted a permission to participate into the Olympics. ApprenticeWiki work 02:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So no evidence of your claims then? Here is a source that says you are wrong about [Kyrgios]. Maybe you are right about some of this, but you have been repeatedly incorrect on several other issues so take some time and provide some evidence. The Olympic list will be published in a couple of weeks, why not keep our list simple until we are sure?18abruce (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@18abruce: Discussion must end for now and case is solved over dispute resolution. Let's wait for the official sources being decided by National Olympic Committees and I agree with your statement. ApprenticeWiki work 05:31, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to be calling for dispute resolution yet all. All we want is a constructive discussion in order to make the information in this article correct. You shouldn't be taking this so personal. It really should be easy to find sources for withdrawals or non-selections. With regards to the BJK/Fed and Davis Cup obligations, that information can easily be verified on the site of these competitions. The profiles of the relevant players on those sites can be used as sources if needed. As for PR entries, it seems the workings of those aren't really clear here. A protected (ATP)/special (WTA) ranking isn't used automatically. When a player gets such a status a player has the right to enter a definite number of events with it. It's up to them to select which events they are using their PR entries for. I strongly doubt that players who are not even eligible for other reasons will waste one here. A PR entry in these tables should be backed up with a reliable source verifying that the player in question used it. It's not because someone used one at the French Open, they'll use one automatically for the Olympics as well. For all I know, the French Open might have been the last time a particular player had the right to use a PR to enter.T v x1 14:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I clarify this for now and I don't totally violate against my edits. Let the tennis governing body will decide, not ours. ApprenticeWiki work 14:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as "the tennis governing body". There is a governing body for the men's tennis (ATP), one for the women's tennis (WTA) and one that organises the national team competitions and lower level tournaments (ITF). The olympics then again are organized by the IOC. For their tennis event they colleborate with the ITF. Whether or not a player is selected is ultimately up to the national governing bodies and players can decline themselves too. There is no specific general decision to wait for. We just report what the sources report.T v x1 16:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to be sure of the athlete's eligibility, but I have no interest in disputing them if we are able to discuss them. I still have a problem with Edmund and Đere: the source on the page in no way indicates that Edmund is not able to play at the Olympics, but does make it sound unlikely, is that enough? He has confirmed that he is out for Wimbledon, but I can't find anything that says beyond that. I believe that Đere has withdrawn based on something that came up on instagram, but we really should have something to validate it.18abruce (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can be sure by simply checking them on the site of the Davis and BJK Cups. I do agree that we need (better) sources for Đere and Edmund. Edmund not taking part appears to be WP:SYNTH. We also really need sources for all those PR entries.T v x1 17:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you. I was trying to look through their bios at the ITF, ATP, or WTA sites as was getting really frustrated. The remaining PR entries appear to match what is being used for Wimbledon, but that is poor evidence of what will be used in the Olympics I guess.18abruce (talk) 00:35, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These PR entries should be sourced for the olympics specifically. Using a PR is no automatic. They can enter a limited number of times using their PR and players tend to carefully select which tournaments they use them for. Deriving these from the Wimbledon entry list is synthesis. For all we know, some of them might have used their last PR entry they were entilted to for Wimbledon.T v x1 11:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion for the PR entries is that Lu be removed for now (not a big deal to add if it is confirmed), Shvedova be left since the Kazakhs have confirmed her entry, Vesnina be removed because it is pointless anyway, and Petkovic be removed for now until there is confirmation.18abruce (talk) 13:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I removed the unsourced PR entries from the men's and the doubles tables. I left Shvedova and Suarez Navarro in as these are sourced.T v x1 17:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are still continuous issues with the addition of unsourced information. Whenever a player withdraws, we should not guess ourselves who the replacement will be, but rather add a replacement once we have a reliable source of who this will be.T v x1 15:58, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As we've known Kasatkina withdrew due to scheduling issues. The next player will be Svetlana Kuznetsova, unless if Kuznetsova is not selected by Russian Olympic Team, Elena Vesnina might be next in the list using of her protected ranking of 52 in singles. ApprenticeWiki work 02:53, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kuznetsova is indeed the next eligible in principle. However, in addition to not being selected she could also decline herself. Especially with players that hadn’t been selected already probably already having penned out a different schedule as a result of that. I’m surprised though that there has been no word on the replacement despite Kasatkina having withdrawn nearly a week ago.T v x1 13:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Still the same story. People keep adding information without a reliable source. Is providing a reliable source really that much we’re asking for.T v x1 16:10, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

host in the doubles tables

not sure the 'right' way to show it, but either the japanese entries should be listed in the 'host' spot, or if not then the listing should say, "up to 32" not 31. If they are listed among the 24 doubles entries does that mean one more from the singles priority, or one more doubles entry? There is nothing in the ITFs qualification document that indicates reallocation for doubles.18abruce (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The reallocation section of the ITF’s qualification document clearly mentions reallocation of host spots of both singles players and doubles teams.T v x1 16:31, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right that it indicates that an unused doubles host spot is to be reallocated, silly that I overlooked that. But is says to the "Combined Rankings." However, I am still not convinced that it is to be reallocated anyway; the singles says that if a host athlete has not already qualified, then the host spot can be used, the doubles does not say that.18abruce (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even for the singles priority entries they use their combined rankings to determine their eligibility. The simply form pairs from players already qualified for the singles events.T v x1 12:22, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A few more to add

In men's singles feel free to add Sumit Nagal [3] and Juan Pablo Varillas [4]. Stryn (talk) 19:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are already there for a while.T v x1 12:48, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protected rankings

In the main draw Kohlschreiber is not mentioned as entering through PR, whereas Vondrousova is. Can anyone shed their light on this? Both wouldn’t have needed their PR status by the way. If not entering through PR, the tables on this page should be reordered accordingly. Poll3tj3 (talk) 11:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's the source for the PR information on the main draw pages even? We should make sure our articles are not contradictory. When the original entry list was made, Kohlschreiber did use his PR to get accepted. Later withdrawals than create the situation where his ranking would have been enough for a direct entry, but I'm not sure whether players get their PR entry back after having originally used to enter for a tournament.T v x1 11:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As for Markéta Vondroušová, I have put here in her actual 14 June ranking position. She did not have to use a protected ranking to enter for this event at all. There is no reason whatsoever why she would have wasted one.T v x1 16:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed Kohlschreiber to PR on the main draw page to keep things consistent. For all I know Vondrousova could have used PR to be seeded? But as she isn’t, that tells me she’s not using it. Anyway, some sources would be nice, esp. regarding Kohlschreiber. Anyone? Poll3tj3 (talk) 17:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Karolína Muchová has a better ranking than Markéta Vondroušová. Without protected ranking she would not have been able to go to the Olympics. M9155 (talk) 05:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]