Rodneck got the easy draw

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by barry, Jul 3, 2004.

  1. barry

    barry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,270
    Can you imagine how a player can reach the finals of a grand slam event and never have played a ranked player below 31?

    His opponents were ranked 181,128,31,90,23,63. What an easy setup draw.

    It is by belief we should start seeding the 128 players based on the current 52-week rankings. Might make the outcome of the grand slam event different, but we would see better quality tennis.
     
    #1
  2. dantyem108

    dantyem108 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    384
    so, 23 (shalken) isn't below 31??? Check your own facts before you post, lol
     
    #2
  3. Jack Romeo

    Jack Romeo Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2004
    Messages:
    992
    If I remember correctly, Pete Sampras won the 2000 Wimbledon title without having to face anyone in the top 20. His finals opponent, Patrick Rafter, was 27th (though seeded 10th) at that time.
     
    #3
  4. joebedford

    joebedford Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Wouldn't that be "above", and "23"?
     
    #4
  5. perfmode

    perfmode Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,767
    Half of the top 32 seeds were in his draw. Shut the f*** up. The top seeds were all beaten by these "non top 32" players.
     
    #5
  6. mlee2

    mlee2 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    249
    Rankings don't mean squat when a "lower" player like Ancic played great tennis throughout the whole tournament.

    You're probably the same type of person who'll discredit Roddick ("Ancic should've won/Roddick got lucky") for beating an on-fire Ancic in 4 sets while Henman just "simply got outplayed" despite getting his ass kicked around as Ancic's b!tch.

    In your obvious haste to discredit "Rodneck," you forgot 23 is a higher number than 31.

    You're either incredibly biased or an idiot. Either way, STFU.
     
    #6
  7. TwistServe

    TwistServe Guest

    The problem is most the top players are not grass court players, so they lose to these "non top 32"..

    For instance, Coria, Moya, Gaudio, Chela, Robredo, guga, pavel, ferrero, Safin, etc... They all got knocked out or didn't participate..

    So on paper, it may seem Roddick had an easy draw by only playing "non top 32", but in essense he played the best grass courters of the tornament.
     
    #7
  8. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    who are these top grass court players you are speaking of? certainly u cant consider popp, dent and schalken potential wimbledon winners.

    look at the points race this year, how are the ppl roddick plays doing?

    here is a link, try to find the names of any on this list

    http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/championsrace/

    just compare the draws of federer to that of roddick, if u cant see the difference watch tennis for a 2nd year and come back.
     
    #8
  9. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    henman, arazi, gonzalez, novak, robredo, hrbaty, horna, schuettler, spadea, chela, massu, and pavel. those were the seeds on his side of the draw. not exactly a group u would pick to win wimbledon. henman and philopoussis are the only potential threats in the whole bottom section.
     
    #9
  10. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Given their prior perfomances here, Henman and Philippousis were threats to Roddick -- particularly Henman, who has a good record against Roddick.

    But why is the supposed ease of Roddick's draw relevant? :?: It didn't impact Federer, whose draw may have looked tougher on paper, but turned out to be basically a cake-walk for him. It's not as if he's going to be exhausted going into the final. Neither guy is.

    At the end of the day, the two best grasscourt players in the draw are left standing. Which is what almost everyone expected anyway.

    I realize there's a sense of disappointment that Andy is a contender in these events. But it's a fact, and no amount of whining and complaining is going to change it. :wink:
     
    #10
  11. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    id hardly consider roddick a great grass court player, hell, lendl volleyd better than him.

    its just a shame they put all the talent in the top side of the draw and we only get to see bottom half matches on espn.
     
    #11
  12. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Roddick won the last two Queen's Trophies. This year he beat Kucera, Ancic, Srichaphan, Hewitt and Grosjean, on his way to the Trophy. Not exactly the easiest draw.

    And Roger won Halle, and has the biggest grasscourt streak going. I believe Andy has the second best, with his only loss in two seasons coming in last year's Wimbly semis.

    So no matter how the draw was divided up, tomorrow's final is hardly a surprise. :roll:
     
    #12
  13. PJVA

    PJVA Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    268
    I think that Roddick just has luck in getting easy draws, while Federer has the worst luck. In the French Open for example Roddick's quarter was loaded with Americans and only Fabrice Santoro and Chela as clay courters. Federer had Guga in the third round!

    Now in Wimby, Roddick didn't have the caliber of opponents that Federer did. Federer had to face Karlovic, Hewitt, and Grosjean. Roddick's last three opponents were Pop, Shalken, and Ancic.
     
    #13
  14. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Federer played Hewitt and Grosjean in the QF and SF. Roddick played Schalken and then Ancic. The apparent ease with which Federer beat Hewitt and Grosjean isn't the point. The point is Hewitt and Grosjean are much better players than Schalken and Ancic.
     
    #14
  15. barry

    barry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,270
    Intesesting observations, if the draw does not matter, maybe the event should just seed by ranking. Then this point is mute.

    Agassi use to get the easy draws, played the same guy at the U.S. Open 3 years in a row, delgato. I think it only fair to all players, your 52 week ranking is where you should be seeded.

    What a joke Seeding Venus number 3 and the heavy one number 1. Jen and lindsay were ranked higher.

    Why let some tournament official decide!
     
    #15
  16. perfmode

    perfmode Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,767
    Having a high rank/seed is only a privelage that you get. If you work hard and play well all year, you get an easier draw. That does not mean that you are going to win the event. It's like qualifying for pole position in a race. You get an advantage for being the best coming into the event.
     
    #16
  17. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    but if they dont place the seeds in the proper places in the draw it doesnt matter. federer played hewitt in the quarters, 1 vs 7. while roddick was scheduled to play schuettler, 2 vs 8. anyone who has ever ran a tournament knows the sums should be equal, that of 9 for the quarters, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, and 4 vs 5. id say the seedings catered toward roddick. they also put the #3 seed into federers half so u get a 1 vs 3, 2 vs 4 semi.

    hard to debate the evidence that the draw was easier for roddick. not just in player caliber but in the seeding alone.
     
    #17
  18. devila

    devila Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,749
    I see grass court fans here!!!!! :lol:
     
    #18
  19. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Roger and Andy were seeded where they were supposed to be seeded -- based on their ATP entry system ranking.

    If the tourney officials did any rigging, as alleged, I'd say it was done to benefit "Our Tim" rather than Roddick. That at least would make some sense. :wink:
     
    #19
  20. Chopin

    Chopin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,103
    Location:
    St. John, USVI
    I agree with VamosRafa
     
    #20
  21. SonicSpeed

    SonicSpeed Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    267
    It is not Roddick's fault that the seeds didn't come through his part of the draw to meet him. Obviously they weren't good enough to beat the "non-seeds" or "lower ranked" players. But when Andy played them, he beat them. Andy was good enough to get the job done while the other seeds couldn't.

    And you can only play who's put in front of you.

    As to 1 v. 8, 2 v. 7.....seedings have always EITHER put it 1 v. 7 OR 1 v. 8.....there was never a set pattern.
     
    #21
  22. Chadwixx

    Chadwixx Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,639
    do simple math and look at the history of seeding. any fool knows the 1 is supposed to play the 8 and 2 vs 7. the #1 is supposed to get the benefit of the draw not the #2. its almost impossible to argue because its common sense. a fair draw says the numbers come out equal for all players, an unfair draw says they dont.
     
    #22
  23. SonicSpeed

    SonicSpeed Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    267
    I understand your point and I agree with you but it has been this way for awhile. Look at the grand slam seeding placements in the recent years. The Wimbledon draw this year wasn't made JUST to benefit "Rodneck".
     
    #23
  24. chicagohpch

    chicagohpch Rookie

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    105
    Selfish Brits

    As long as Roger remains No.1 and Andy remains No. 2 seed at Wimbledon, Tim Henman and Andy will be placed in the easier half. A lot of people (Lleyton, Moya, Grosjean, Safin, etc.) in the top half may very well have stopped Andy if the draw were reversed. The only legitimate one on the bottom half is Tim Henman (excluding black horses). Watch for next year's draw: same thing.
     
    #24
  25. Matt H.

    Matt H. Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,279

    Are you talking about the same Ancic who wiped the floor with Federer at Wimbledon a few years ago? Ahh, i must be mistaken. :roll:


    Now everyone is bashing Roddick for the draw. HE HAS NO F'N CONTROL OVER HOW THE DRAW COMES OUT. He plays who he has to, that's it.


    And to the troll who said that Popp and Dent aren't good players....THEY'RE AWESOME ON GRASS! Popp had made the Quarter's every year he played until this year against Roddick. Dent's game is taylor-made for grass. :roll:
     
    #25
  26. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    I disagree. We'll never know, but Andy would have been the fave in any of those match-ups.

    Safin couldn't get past the first round, against a guy ranked No. 97.

    This is the first time Moya has gotten past the second round of Wimbledon in about 7 tries, and Andy is 3-0 over him.

    Andy beat Hewitt and Grosjean at Queen's in two sets a couple weeks ago (he beat Grosjean last year in two sets as well).

    Don't know who "etc." is, but imo, the biggest threat to Andy other than Roger was Henman. Andy doesn't have a great record against Tim, and he would have had to play all of Britain as well as Tim. He got a bit lucky that Tim didn't advance, although to be honest, I saw several of Tim's matches, and he was looking less than sharp the whole fortnight. Talk about pressure!
     
    #26

Share This Page