This is entirely not what I was talking about. Of course there are players below the top 30 that are good. I was saying that to find 16 players just from the top 30 was difficult, moving on to 32 would just continue to be more hassle. Further, there's time constraints that under consideration when coming up with the size and the format of the tournament. 16 for this tournament at this time, is the size that makes the most sense.Mariya wrote:
Well, theres good player below top 30 too. It would be nice to see how those player perform in a tournament and it might be a good way to prepare them for the future.
But yeah, it's a shame not everyone can atm, it would be quite entertaining.