Quote:
Originally Posted by EgorK
a system where second criteria after number of wins is number of matches played, the more, the better?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerr
Sinner so close to being the first alternate I’m aware of to win 2 matches
At the 1998 ATP Finals, Agassi withdrew down 2-1 in the deciding set against Corretja and was replaced by 1st alternate Rusedski. Rios withdrew afte losing to Henin and was replaced by 2nd alternate Costa. So there were two alternates in the same group who would each get to play two matches, not only that, but the two alternates would play each other.
Rusedski beat Herman and Costa however did not qualify due to the matches played tiebreaker.
1. Henman 2-1 (won H2H v Corretja)
2. Corretja 2-1
3. Rusedski 2-0 (didn’t even lose a set)
4. Costa 0-2