2015 men's World Rankings leaders

[gh]

those who subscribe to e-version of the magazine or get the eNewsletter will already have seen the completely top 10s.

As a tease for those who don't subscribe, you can find all the men's No. 1s posted to the front page.

Probably only 1 event that will spark any debate (a debate we had at season's end, of course).

[Atticus]

Probably only 1 event that will spark any debate (a debate we had at season's end, of course).

I'd like to register my quibble on mPV. What was the win-loss record between the top 2? It looks like 2-2 to me, making the WC the tie-breaker. I get the DL record and better sequence of marks, but it would seem in this case the Global Title nudges it over to your #2.

[norunner]

And where does it say that your criteria are the decisive ones? Why not compare 6m results? 7-0, or DL wins, or or or.

[Atticus]

I'm just going by T&FN's, which has win-loss record first, honors won (!) second, and marks last.

[norunner]

By that logic Nijel Amos should be No1 over 800, it's obviously not set in stone.

[gh]

I'm just going by T&FN's, which has win-loss record first, honors won (!) second, and marks last.

errrr, that's news to me!

[Atticus]

errrr, that's news to me!

OK - b, a, c

[gh]

I'd like to register my quibble on mPV. What was the win-loss record between the top 2? It looks like 2-2 to me, making the WC the tie-breaker. I get the DL record and better sequence of marks, but it would seem in this case the Global Title nudges it over to your #2.

read the accompanying copy in the magazine.

[OneWay]

the magazines stated criteria is never followed to a "t" especially the lower half of the rankings which resembles a "just throw a few names in" rather than a calculated assessment of the worthy candidates.

[gh]

actually, the Rankers spend more time wrestling with the bottom half of the compilations than they do the top half. Sorting out non-podium types with a reduced number of clashes against the big guns is decidedly the toughest part of the process.