Mike Guidry 2003 explanation for protected seeding at IRT events

Todd Boss Note: the question of "Why do the top 8 IRT players get byes into the 16s" comes up often in discussion boards. Newer fans of the pro tours don't understand it, think it provides preferential treatment to the top 8 players, and generally think its unfair. This policy was put in place back in the 1999 time frame and actually had little to do with "protecting" the top 8 players.

The below is a verbatim cut-and-paste explanation from none other than former touring pro Mike Guidry, as posted to the old Usenet group alt.sport.racquetball back in 2003. I've added some historical context for Guidry's comments as put into place with square brackets [ ]. All other words are verbatim from Guidry's post at the time. Bolding for emphasis is also mine to illustrate points.

Mike's response:

"Let me try to address the issue about the NEW IRT AND THE CURRENT FORMAT that seems to be causing some controversy and see if this helps at all. As a player who has been on both sides of the issue [protected top 8 seeding in IRT events] and currently has to play the qualifying, I think that I am pretty well qualified to address it.

There are numerous reasons why the IRT went to the current format that we have as opposed to the old way [which was qualifying to the 32s].

1. When all players had to play a round of 32 match, the qualifying had to be on Wed. night. Therefore, anyone ranked outside the top 24 had to come in a day early to try to qualify. As you well know, rball is not a big money sport so those players not only had to take an extra day off of work, but also had to pay for an extra day of hotel, food, rental car, etc. Even the top 24 in the draw had to come in one day earlier because the main draw started at 10:30 on Thursday morning. So, the first reason was to save everyone money in travel expenses as well as time away from home and work. So, assuming we have 18 tournaments in a season, this format allows ALL players 18 more days at home with their families each year as well as saves them close to $1800 per year in expenses( Averaging $100 per day).
2. We almost doubled the prize money for the round of 16 losers once we changed to the current format. Therefore, the players that make it to the round of 16 make more money than they ever did before.
3. By changing the format, it actually helps lower ranked players improve their rankings. I know this is where many people are not seeing the logic here, but let me explain. Let's say the #29 ranked player enters the tournament with the old format. He has to qualify into the main draw, which is the round of 32. His round of 32 match [in the 2003 timeframe] would be #4 John Ellis. Presuming he loses to John, he gets no money and gets points only for the round of 32. With that format, it is very unlikely that his ranking will improve because he will have to play the #4 player in the 32 ALWAYS. Even if he moves up to #25, he still plays the #8 player in the 32's.

   Ok, with the new format, The #29 ranked player plays #20 into #13 in the round of 32's. The #29 ranked player plays no more matches than he would have in the old format, however, he now plays the #13 ranked player in the 32's rather than playing #4. Granted, it is still a tough match in the 32's, but he has a much better chance of beating #13 than he does of beating #4. So, now, he has a better chance of winning his round of 32 match, he gets more ranking points which will improve his ranking and he gets almost twice as much money as before.

4. I know that the argument is that the top 8 players get a rest by not having to play the round of 32's. In the past, the round of 32's for the top 8 were ALMOST ALWAYS 3 game blowouts that lasted less than 30 minutes. Now, there were rare times that one of the top 8 players had a tough match and even fewer times that they lost in the round of 32's. So, to say that the top 8 guys are getting a big rest by not having to play a 32 match really doesn't hold much water. [Todd Boss note: I can attest to this in an additional way; even in the sport's hey-day in the mid 1970s, the historical record of matches literally did not bother to keep track of the opponents of the top players' matches in the round of 32, which is why there are so many losers listed as "?" for older matches. Most of the time, as Guidry notes, the round of 32 was a complete blow-out against a local player.]

   Now, with the new format, the top 8 are on the court playing sponsor doubles EVERY tournament while the qualifying is going on [on Thursday nights]. Therefore, the top 8 guys are not only on the court playing, but they are promoting the sport with the very ones who are directly supporting the IRT. As a player who has been on both sides of the qualifying, I would personally rather play a match where I can get warmed up and get used to the courts than play sponsor doubles. The top 8 player goes into his first match without the opportunity to have really played on the courts.

   I also believe that the argument was that the new format makes it more difficult for the qualifier to win the tournament. Again, based on the way that the new format is set up, it actually makes it more likely that a qualifier can win a tournament. For example, I was a qualifier last week in NY [when Mike won the 1/19/2003 NYC Pro-Am as the #13 seed (believed). Match report here].

   One of the reasons that it may seem to the average person that the new format is unfair and that it makes it more difficult is that rarely do the top players lose. That is not a product of the system, that is 100% a product of the fact that the top 8 players are the top 8 players in the world for a reason.....THEY ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE!! Period, end of story. You can choose any format that you want to, but the best players in the World will still be the best players in the World.

   I apologize for the long post, but I hope that this explains it in a way that makes it as clear as possible and is not insulting to anyone. The reality is that rball is not a big money sport and I, as well as the other players and Dave Negrete [The IRT commissioner at the time of this writing], truly believe this is the fairest system for all players not only playing wise, but financially.

   Contrary to the belief of some people, the purpose is not to give the top 8 a break, but to make it the most economically feasible for as many players as possible to play and be successful on the IRT tour.

   Hope this helps"

   Mike Guidry