PDA

View Full Version : Wimbledon Seeding


barry
06-10-2007, 10:32 AM
Will the Wimbledon seeding committee seed Roddick over Nadal again this year. All other grand slam events seed by rank.

Federer will be seeded 1!

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
06-10-2007, 10:37 AM
depending on what happens in queens, if Roddick wins it should be Fed no 1 roddick no 2, if Roddick loses early and Nadal goes far it should be Fed no 1 Nadal no. 2

Fedace
06-10-2007, 10:37 AM
Rafa will get #1 seeding for being a hottest player on tour.

helloworld
06-10-2007, 10:39 AM
I think Nadal was seeded number 2 last year,too. Maybe I'm wrong, but this year he's the number 2 seed for sure due to his last year performance and his actual ranking

ACE of Hearts
06-10-2007, 10:40 AM
Hahahahaha, yeah right.By the way, i think Nadal will get the second seed.I am just curious to see what kind of draw they give him.

AAAA
06-10-2007, 10:42 AM
Nadal, No #2, FO Champ, Wimbledon finalist last year, pretty strong case for #2 seeding at Wimbledon.

Andres
06-10-2007, 10:48 AM
Nadal #2, thanks to his #2 ranking, and his Wimby final.
Roddick is probaly going to be seeded #3

psamp14
06-10-2007, 10:55 AM
Will the Wimbledon seeding committee seed Roddick over Nadal again this year. All other grand slam events seed by rank.

Federer will be seeded 1!

i believe nadal was seeded 2 last year...to your delight roddick will be seeded behind nadal at #3

and of course federer is #1

Forehand Forever
06-10-2007, 10:57 AM
Since Nadal was the finalist at Wimbledon last year he should be #2 I'm hoping Roddick won't meet Federer in any other rounds but the finals.

barry
06-10-2007, 11:01 AM
i believe nadal was seeded 2 last year...to your delight roddick will be seeded behind nadal at #3

and of course federer is #1

I think Roddick should be seeded 5, that is his current ranking. My complaint is ranking are earned, the Wimbledon seeding committee does not honor.

Fee
06-10-2007, 11:02 AM
If Andy makes the final at Queens, he might still get enough points for the #2 seeding. The formula that W. uses is based on the last two years, but since Nadal has so many rankings points over Andy, Andy will probably fall just short of the #2 seed.

Feņa14
06-10-2007, 11:32 AM
Yeah Nadal will definitley be 2nd seed with Roddick being 3rd.

I can virtually guarentee Roddick will be in the opposite half to Federer though ;)

Zaragoza
06-10-2007, 11:36 AM
Of course Nadal has to be the no. 2 seed. He is world no. 2 by far and the current runner-up at Wimbledon, what else do you need? Roddick should be grateful to be higher than no. 5 since that is the spot he deserves. Itīs a ridiculous rule at Wimbledon to donīt respect the rankings. Imagine if Roland Garros did the same thing, would Roddick be top 32? Not sure.

dh003i
06-10-2007, 11:46 AM
Wimbledon is the oldest and most important slam; they were there before the ATP, and they'll be there after the ATP, so f- the ATP. They can do whatever the heck they want.

Maybe Roddick shouldn't be seeded at Roland Garros, or any of the other Americans. They suck monkey-balls on it. We'd have some better tennis if they just didn't play in the thing at all.

scineram
06-10-2007, 11:58 AM
Well said. Wimbledon seeds are also earned. Just differently.
And americans suck in dirt.

psamp14
06-10-2007, 12:02 PM
I think Roddick should be seeded 5, that is his current ranking. My complaint is ranking are earned, the Wimbledon seeding committee does not honor.

#5? i thought roddick will slip to #4 after the french open, because davydenko will take #3

wimbledon i think has always based their seeding on grass court performance, so in my opinion, roddick should be #3...

he did after all make 2 wimbledon finals and 1 semifinal, all of them losses to federer...

Chadwixx
06-10-2007, 12:10 PM
Djokovic only needed 120 pts to pass roddick, i think (not sure) he got it.

They will do everything in their power to seed roddick #2. Wimbledon has been bending over backwards for the us players the past 20 years. Also remember since its "their" rule they can just change it if they want, make it over the past 3 years so its "more of an accurate seeding".

Nadal_Freak
06-10-2007, 12:22 PM
All slams are equally important. :D

scineram
06-10-2007, 01:10 PM
Wimbledon is more equal than the others.

BigServer1
06-10-2007, 01:15 PM
If Nadal isn't the two seed it's a travesty. He's earned it. I don't think we'll see him in the finals again this year, but he's earned that seed.

Zaragoza
06-11-2007, 03:56 AM
Wimbledon is the oldest and most important slam; they were there before the ATP, and they'll be there after the ATP, so f- the ATP. They can do whatever the heck they want.

Maybe Roddick shouldn't be seeded at Roland Garros, or any of the other Americans. They suck monkey-balls on it. We'd have some better tennis if they just didn't play in the thing at all.

Itīs the most important Slam in your eyes. ATP gives same ranking points to all the Slams, deal with it. Every Grand Slam was there before the ATP, not only Wimbledon you know? And other Grand Slams respect rankings because itīs the only fair and objective system to rate players. If every Grand Slam didnīt respect the rankings it would be chaotic but hey itīs Wimbledon, they can make whatever they want. Letīs make something weird so our Slam is distingished from others, thatīs a good tactic but it doesnīt make the tournament more prestigious if you ask me.
You see they respect rankings to determine the players that can enter the main draw but rankings are useless to determine the seeds. Thatīs a non-sense. If you have one criterion keep it the same for all the players.
This is one but not the only thing that annoys me from Wimbledon.
They locate players in different locker rooms depending of their status. Is it also a sign of prestige? Every player deserves to be treated the same you know? You donīt have to discriminate someone because he isnīt an elite player.
I also dislike that they take the first Sunday off. Thatīs the best day of the week for most of people to watch tennis and they donīt play any matches?
Why? Isnīt the menīs final played on Sunday as well? Whatīs wrong with playing on Sunday?
These kind of things make of Wimbledon my least favourite Slam, not to mention that I find grass tennis pretty boring and the ball bounces bad so many times. I see it as a weird Slam but it doesnīt make it better than others IMO.

diggler
06-11-2007, 04:12 AM
Isn't there an objective formula? If it is subjective, you'd have to have Nadal 2 anyway.

Fee
06-11-2007, 06:37 AM
Isn't there an objective formula? If it is subjective, you'd have to have Nadal 2 anyway.

It's a mathematical forumla. I'll see if I can track it down for you.

Steve Dykstra
06-11-2007, 10:31 AM
I think Roddick should be seeded 5, that is his current ranking. My complaint is ranking are earned, the Wimbledon seeding committee does not honor.

I think we all already know your opinion on the matter.

Steve Dykstra
06-11-2007, 10:34 AM
Of course Nadal has to be the no. 2 seed. He is world no. 2 by far and the current runner-up at Wimbledon, what else do you need? Roddick should be grateful to be higher than no. 5 since that is the spot he deserves. Itīs a ridiculous rule at Wimbledon to donīt respect the rankings. Imagine if Roland Garros did the same thing, would Roddick be top 32? Not sure.

If Roland Garros did the same thing, Roddick might be passed up by Gonzalez and Robredo, but I don't think anyone else. Are you actually aware of how the Wimbledon formula works? Your above post makes it seem that you are not.

Andres
06-11-2007, 11:37 AM
Of course Nadal has to be the no. 2 seed. He is world no. 2 by far and the current runner-up at Wimbledon, what else do you need? Roddick should be grateful to be higher than no. 5 since that is the spot he deserves. It´s a ridiculous rule at Wimbledon to don´t respect the rankings. Imagine if Roland Garros did the same thing, would Roddick be top 32? Not sure.
Wimbledon DOES respect the rankings. They have a formula to calculate the seedings: Current ranking points and the grass results for the past two years.

Nadal is going to be seeded #2

http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/bios/seeds.html

Formula for the 2006 seedings:

Gentlemen
The seeds are the top 32 players on the ATP Entry System Position (ESP), BUT then rearranged on a surface-based system. A seeding committee is not required for the Gentlemen's Singles since the seeding order is determined using an objective and transparent system to reflect more accurately an individual player's grass court achievements: The formula is:

* Take ESP points at 19 June 2006
* Add 100% points earned for all grass court tournament in the past 12 months
* Add 75% points earned for best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that.

caulcano
06-11-2007, 02:35 PM
It´s the most important Slam in your eyes. ATP gives same ranking points to all the Slams, deal with it. Every Grand Slam was there before the ATP, not only Wimbledon you know? And other Grand Slams respect rankings because it´s the only fair and objective system to rate players. If every Grand Slam didn´t respect the rankings it would be chaotic but hey it´s Wimbledon, they can make whatever they want. Let´s make something weird so our Slam is distingished from others, that´s a good tactic but it doesn´t make the tournament more prestigious if you ask me.
You see they respect rankings to determine the players that can enter the main draw but rankings are useless to determine the seeds. That´s a non-sense. If you have one criterion keep it the same for all the players.
This is one but not the only thing that annoys me from Wimbledon.
They locate players in different locker rooms depending of their status. Is it also a sign of prestige? Every player deserves to be treated the same you know? You don´t have to discriminate someone because he isn´t an elite player.
I also dislike that they take the first Sunday off. That´s the best day of the week for most of people to watch tennis and they don´t play any matches?
Why? Isn´t the men´s final played on Sunday as well? What´s wrong with playing on Sunday?
These kind of things make of Wimbledon my least favourite Slam, not to mention that I find grass tennis pretty boring and the ball bounces bad so many times. I see it as a weird Slam but it doesn´t make it better than others IMO.

If you took a poll from all the top pros, about which GS they would like to win more than any other, the majority would say Wimbldeon. It's a fact that it's the MOST prestigious event on the tennis calendar.

Edit: But I agree that Wimbldeon's seeding sucks. It should be based on ATP rankings.

isuk@tennis
06-11-2007, 04:20 PM
so wimbledon is seeding based on grass court performance doesn't sound like a bad idea to me
better than seeding a clay court specialist who earned a bunch of points during clay season higher than a grass court specialist during a big grass court tourny
it wouldn't be very fair to the grass specialist seeing how they wouldn't get the correct seeding for that tournament because of extremely short grass period during the year not allowing them a chance to get points before that tournament.

Zaragoza
06-11-2007, 04:56 PM
Wimbledon DOES respect the rankings. They have a formula to calculate the seedings: Current ranking points and the grass results for the past two years.

Nadal is going to be seeded #2

http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/bios/seeds.html

Formula for the 2006 seedings:

Gentlemen
The seeds are the top 32 players on the ATP Entry System Position (ESP), BUT then rearranged on a surface-based system. A seeding committee is not required for the Gentlemen's Singles since the seeding order is determined using an objective and transparent system to reflect more accurately an individual player's grass court achievements: The formula is:

* Take ESP points at 19 June 2006
* Add 100% points earned for all grass court tournament in the past 12 months
* Add 75% points earned for best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that.

Thanks, I didn´t know the exact formula but I don´t see it as a respect for rankings! There is a big BUT (not butt:) ) if they add all of those points on grass. Since the seeds are not in the same order than the rankings they are not respecting rankings, that´s the way I see it. I don´t even think it´s a good formula. Anyway we can wait one more week and see how much rankings are respected.

J-man
06-11-2007, 05:02 PM
If Nadal is going to be seeded #2 then Federer will meet Roddick earlier.

fastdunn
06-11-2007, 05:10 PM
I'll be interested in where Gasquet, Djokovic and ..... Karlovic
might be placed in the draw.

tennis_hand
06-11-2007, 05:23 PM
I thought Wimbledon has already agreed to use the ATP ranking after all the pressure? so in this case, Nadal will be No2, and Roddick will be No 5.

Fee
06-11-2007, 05:34 PM
Nope, they are using the same formula they used last year. There has been no pressure on Wimbledon since they switched to a formula. The pressure was a few years ago when they were doing it by 'committee.'

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
06-11-2007, 08:11 PM
I think the seeding will go with the official ranking..

roysid
06-11-2007, 08:47 PM
Nadal was #2 seed last year. Though his grass result was poor (before Wimby' 06) the difference in ATP points with others was enough to make him 2nd seed.

Roddick was ranked probably 5 or 6. He was seeded 3.

This year. Nadal will definitely be #2 seed. What should be intersting is that whether Roddick gets #3 or #4 seeding.


My opinion is that it's a very good thing to determine seeds based on ATP points and grass court expertise. In fact, French Open also should do it. It's so crazy when you Roddick seeded 3rd in French. And Nadal next year would be seeded #2 if he is #2 in ATP (though French champion for last 3 years).

tennis_hand
06-11-2007, 09:19 PM
Check out this by eurosport ranking:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/11062007/58/wimbledon-grass-court-rankings.html


1. (1) Roger Federer

2. (16) Lleyton Hewitt

3. (39) Jonas Bjorkman

4. (2) Rafael Nadal

5. (17) Mario Ancic

6. (3) Andy Roddick

7. (19) Marcos Baghdatis

8. (53) Tim Henman

9. (13) Richard Gasquet

10. (28) Robin Soderling

11. (5) Fernando Gonzalez

12. (8) James Blake

13. (12) Tomas Berdych

14. (23) Jarkko Nieminen

15. (55) Fabrice Santoro

16. (58) Radek Stepanek

Formula:

10 winner; 8 runner-up; 6 semi-finalist; 4 quarter-finalist: 2006 Wimbledon;

7.5 winner; 6 runner-up; 4.5 semi-finalist; 3.5 quarter-finalist: 2007 Queen's, Halle, Nottingham, 's-Hertogenbosch

5 winner; 4 runner-up; 3 semi-finalist; 2 quarter-finalist: 2005 Wimbledon; 2006 Queen's, Halle, Nottingham, 's-Hertogenbosch

1 bonus point for any quarter-final or better at Wimbledon 2000-2004

idj49
06-12-2007, 02:43 AM
That's a dumb formula, it doesn't take into account actual rankings. Why should someone who isn't even in the top 40 be seeded?

caulcano
06-12-2007, 03:02 AM
Nadal was #2 seed last year. Though his grass result was poor (before Wimby' 06) the difference in ATP points with others was enough to make him 2nd seed.

Roddick was ranked probably 5 or 6. He was seeded 3.

This year. Nadal will definitely be #2 seed. What should be intersting is that whether Roddick gets #3 or #4 seeding.


My opinion is that it's a very good thing to determine seeds based on ATP points and grass court expertise. In fact, French Open also should do it. It's so crazy when you Roddick seeded 3rd in French. And Nadal next year would be seeded #2 if he is #2 in ATP (though French champion for last 3 years).


I said a few months back Nadal should be #1 at RG. His clay court record for the last 3 years is simply awesome. I think it would be a great honour for Nadal to be #1 at RG next year ... but it will never happen ... unless he's #1 in the ATP rankings or Federer doesn't compete for whatever reason.

Scorch
06-12-2007, 05:59 AM
I think that in an ideal world we would have 6 weeks of grass court tournaments to sort out the rankings (albeit slightly) in time for Wimbledon then there would be no need for adjustments just as there is no need elsewhere.

However, there is no chance of that as there simply are not enough weeks in the year, therefore a formula is required.

Having said this it should have some component relating to their current ranking.

Andres
06-12-2007, 06:05 AM
I think that in an ideal world we would have 6 weeks of grass court tournaments to sort out the rankings (albeit slightly) in time for Wimbledon then there would be no need for adjustments just as there is no need elsewhere.

However, there is no chance of that as there simply are not enough weeks in the year, therefore a formula is required.

Having said this it should have some component relating to their current ranking.
They have. Check the formula posted a couple of posts above this ;)

Jack the Hack
06-12-2007, 07:31 AM
Will the Wimbledon seeding committee seed Roddick over Nadal again this year. All other grand slam events seed by rank.

Two constant themes always come out in barry's posts:

1.) He's personally never had a problem with Maxline/Eagnas customer service, so everyone else that is having issues must be making things up or whining.

2.) Andy Roddick sucks, and a huge global conspiracy led by sports manufacturers and the USTA is forcing Grand Slam committees to give him favorable draws to artificially prop up his ranking.

Never mind presenting any actual FACTS in your replies here, because barry will just ignore them.

However, for all of you other folks that are getting your Nike capris into a bunch, here were the top 8 seeds from Wimbledon last year:

1. Roger Federer
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Andy Roddick
4. David Nalbandian
5. Ivan Ljubicic
6. Lleyton Hewitt
7. Mario Ancic
8. James Blake

Here's the source: http://www.atptennis.com/en/common/TrackIt.asp?file=http://www.atptennis.com/posting/2006/540/MDS.pdf

As you can clearly see, Rafa got the #2 seed last year, despite not really having any grass court results. His ATP ranking was too high last year to be effected by the formula that the Wimbledon committee used, and that will be the case again this year (although, the whole thing is a mute point because of Nadal's finals appearance last year anyway). Therefore, by barry saying "will Wimbledon seed Roddick ahead of Nadal again", he is just ignoring basic facts that anyone could check within seconds on the web. However, I suspect he already knows this information and is just trolling to agitate others for his personal amusement again. ;)

tennis_hand
06-12-2007, 05:39 PM
I also couldn't believe eurosport comes out a ranking that put Bjorkman as the No3 seed. lol.

Chadwixx
06-12-2007, 06:03 PM
Someone said if roddick wins the warm ups he will be the #2, any truth to this?

Max G.
06-13-2007, 03:55 AM
Someone said if roddick wins the warm ups he will be the #2, any truth to this?

No, that doesn't seem possible to me, looking at the points.

Serendipitous
06-10-2010, 04:36 PM
Will the Wimbledon seeding committee seed Roddick over Nadal again this year.

Sorry, but I just don't see this happening. :neutral:

Max G.
06-10-2010, 05:48 PM
PEOPLE ABOUT TO POST - NOTE THAT THIS THREAD ISN'T ABOUT THIS YEAR'S WIMBLEDON, it's an old thread.

Chadwixx
06-10-2010, 05:51 PM
There is no way now that roddick lost to dudi

wangs78
06-10-2010, 06:02 PM
I hope they don't give Fed an unfairly tough draw. Everyone wants to see Fed in the final, whether it's against Nadal or Murray or Roddick. And that's the truth. He's the reigning champion and 6 time winner and we all want to see him on the final Sunday, win or lose!

Chadwixx
06-10-2010, 06:09 PM
I dont think fed could of gotten a worse draw than he got at the french.

Everyone who can serve over 125 will be in his side of the draw like usual, while nadal will get the clay specialists.

Big_Dangerous
06-10-2010, 08:38 PM
Sorry, but I just don't see this happening. :neutral:

"You! How many upped dead threads does that make for you today, like 8 upped dead threads!"