Serena seeded 28th at US Open

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by dirtballer, Aug 23, 2011.

  1. dirtballer

    dirtballer Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    944
    #1
  2. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Hopefully she draws Wozniacki in the 3rd round so the Woz can drop even more ranking points. Wozniacki will probably drop out of the tournament with the flu if that happens and play a futures event in Egypt for more points instead.
     
    #2
  3. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,396
    Considering Serena's last outing at the USO, perhaps it was to be expected...
     
    #3
  4. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Guest

    When was that?
     
    #4
  5. dirtballer

    dirtballer Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    944
    I believe it was 1996. The rumor was that CBS wanted a Sampras - Agassi semifinal for super Saturday and asked the Open if they could facilitate it. To get the pairings in line for the Sampras - Agassi semi, the Open initially dropped Kafelnikov from 4th to 7th, claiming that he had an injured back. Kafelnikov had won the French Open that year. The outrage was so extreme that the Open backed off and seeded by ranking. CBS still wags the dog. Remember two years ago when CBS rushed Del Potro through his winner's ceremony because of their "time window."
     
    #5
  6. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,951
    Pfft....Delpo isn't American, and CBS had to air that rerun of "Surviving and dancing with celebrity idols in hell's kitchen" in its entirety.
     
    #6
  7. rommil

    rommil Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    7,683
    Location:
    CT
    When Serena found out, she was delirious, stomped her right leg and the whole east coast shook.
     
    #7
  8. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    I've been watching the Open for 25 years. They always rush the ceremony if it goes beyond their scheduled timeslot, nationality has nothing to do with it. Delpo got to say more than sampras did in most of his uso wins. CBS didn't even show any of the trophy presentation in '89.

    They did lots of strange things that year, & actually re-did the draw (but not the seedings. Agassi had dropped to 8 that year, they didn't want to risk a Sampras-Agassi QF, so moved him to 6. Kafelnikov withdrew from the tournament after all this)

    I think I have a copy of the original draw somewhere.

    from steveg:

    http://www.************.com/rankings/1994-1996/jd082696.txt
     
    #8
  9. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    some more on '96

    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/08/23/s...-sows-seeds-of-doubt.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm
     
    #9
  10. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    http://articles.nydailynews.com/1996-08-25/sports/18009772_1_seeding-draw-atp-tour
     
    #10
  11. Tanya

    Tanya Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Seeds are somewhat irrelevant given the results of the WTA this year... Truth is there is no way to predict who is going to win a certain match since seeded girls have been dropping like flies in the early goings of the recent tournaments. Serena's seeded, which is good, so she won't have to play a seeded player until at least the 3rd round but still... there is no guarantee that another seeded player is even going to make it that far anyway!
     
    #11
  12. heftylefty

    heftylefty Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,388
    Location:
    Long Beach, CA
    Agreed. I think this may work to Williams advantage. She will get tough matches early while tearing through the draw. Do you think any of the "top" seeds want to meet Williams in the 4th round or earlier?
     
    #12
  13. dirtballer

    dirtballer Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    944
    I wondered what that was. My curtains were swaying.
     
    #13
  14. moshi2

    moshi2 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    356
    Location:
    M1dwest
    HAHAHAHA, that's a good one! LOL
     
    #14
  15. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,930
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Why wouldn't they stick with the rankings...she lost in the 4th round of Wimbledon, and even though since then she has showed much better game they can't just ignore the fact that she was out of the game for almost a year with health issues. I don't see any reason to just hand her a higher seeding...because she is American? a Former Champion? what? In all honesty if she is truly ready and fitter then she was at Wimbledon whatever she is seeded shouldn't be a problem for her anyway, she won the Australian that time not even seeded...so really..if shes ready, her seeding won't matter, it'll all be on her, so really...why complain?
     
    #15
  16. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    ^seeding her higher would be more for the benefit of the other players, not her. do you think anyone in the top 5 wants to play her in the 3rd round? that is what's going to happen.

    which is better for the tournament a Sharapova-Serena SF or final, or a Sharapova-Serena 3rd round?

    plus the whole 'us open series' things seems kind of odd when you can win it & be seeded so low at the us open.
     
    #16
  17. Crichton

    Crichton New User

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    78
    I believe it was the '96 Open that they seeded Monica Seles as a co-#1 with Graf. They could have done that here, or put her in Clister's spot.
     
    #17
  18. spiderman123

    spiderman123 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    840
    :raises an eyebrow like Nadal:

    Is that a trick question?

    why do I get a feeling that somehow you are suggesting that the first option is the correct one?
     
    #18
  19. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,930
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Of course no one wants to play her in the openining rounds and it would of course be better for the tours top names to play in later rounds, but regardless, this is what happens when you are off of the tour for so long due to injuries. Her ranking dropped, and then when she went out in the 4th round of Wimbledon it nose dived, you can only earn so many points over the summer. If they had seeded her higher people would have just gone "Did her time completely gone for almost a year mean nothing? why is she seeded higher then players who earned their points and stuff by playing all year round?"

    When Henin came back she had the same problem, she made the finals of her first Tournament back and then went into the Aussie and ended up drawing Dementieva as her 2nd round opponent..was it great for either one of them no but its what happens. As for the US Open series, anyone can technically win it, but you can only earn so many points for the summer hard court swing. Should seedings for the open be weighted more in favor of that? I personally don't think so. The only thing the Open series actually offers the players is a chance for more $$ at the Open, and so far only 1 series winner has actually gone on to win the Open the year they won the series anyway I think (Clijsters) so in terms of a predictor its not entirely great anyway.

    Like I said, if Serena really is fit, as recent months seem to show, then her seeding won't matter. Does it make whoever draws her happy, no, but thats the risk of the sport and the risk of the draws. She could fall anywhere, and I doubt anyone wants to play her or would want to play her anytime in the tournament regardless of what her seeding is anyway. She didn't get bumped for her Aussie title she won from being unseeded and she wasn't likely to get bumped up now. If shes fit she wins, regardless of her seeding, if she plays well its hers. If not, well, oh well, she wasn't capable. Given the up and down tour her top seeded potential 3rd round opponent could just get kicked out earlier anyway.
     
    #19
  20. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,270
    True, or fall to SW in a hypothetical 3rd round, which would not too bad, since a top 5 player who never had a chance to take the title was just removed--saving the audience from certian players just going through the motions into week 2, but was not a serious contender in a final.
     
    #20
  21. heftylefty

    heftylefty Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,388
    Location:
    Long Beach, CA
    Look, it doesn't matter if Williams is seeded 1, 28, or not at all. Smart money is not going to bet against her. There are not too many roadblocks in place preventing her to reach the final.

    But I would love to know when another 28th seed was a favorite to win a Major.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2011
    #21
  22. Smasher08

    Smasher08 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,034
    Location:
    The 6
    When I saw this seeding I actually laughed out loud. Based on the past two months, she should probably be in the top 5 or top 10.

    She's easily my pick to win it.
     
    #22
  23. kishnabe

    kishnabe G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    17,090
    Location:
    Toronto
    I hope she is in Wozzy QTR. We can tell who is the real NO 1!
     
    #23
  24. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    The only players who can beat Serena without her having a total crap day with Clijsters out are Li Na and Kvitova. However I doubt those two will survive long enough to face Serena right now, unless they draw her early. Kvitova is having a predictable post first slam letdown, I think long run she will be fine but probably wont factor into the Open much. Li Na has too many players who can beat her.
     
    #24
  25. MichaelNadal

    MichaelNadal Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,817
    Location:
    Tuning Up The Band...
    That time Venus was seeded ridiculously low for Wimbledon. Or she might have been unseeded actually.
     
    #25
  26. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Venus won Wimbledon in 2007 as the #23 seed. Venus was not the favorite to win that year though. The bookies had Henin and Serena as the overwhelming favorites to win that year.
     
    #26
  27. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=13816&zoneid=25
     
    #27
  28. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,863
    I'm guessing Seles was ranked pretty low at the '95 USO(after 2 year abscence from tour) but was co seeded 1 with Graf.

    And Clijsters at '09 USO was unseeded.
     
    #28
  29. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Clijsters definitely wasnt the favorite at the 09 U.S Open though.

    I dont know if Seles was for the 95 U.S Open or not.
     
    #29
  30. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,930
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Ya Clijsters wasn't a bookie favorite...she was a fan favorite for the title for sure, but overall Serena as the defending and current Wimbledon Champ was the favorite for the Open that year...as for 95...I am pretty sure Graf was the Favorite for the title, but Seles definitely had a lot of buzz as she won her first tournament back on the tour.

    As for this US Open, Serena, its yours to lose I think. Shes won from lower down, shes a fighter. With Kim out, I can think of maybe a handful of ladies that might have a prayer if Serena is really dialed in and hungry. If Serena gets to the Quarters...I say its hers. If shes going to lose I think its going to be early, the more momentum she builds the more confident and hungry she will get. She is obviously so much fitter then she was at Wimbledon, so well...we'll have to see. She is definitely a favorite. Li Na, Kvitova if she snaps herself together, Maria is Serena is really off, and maybe, maybe a couple of others could pose a problem, Serena has had troubles at weird times before. But if the will is there and her body is with it...well..I'd say she'll match Kims 2005 achievement.
     
    #30
  31. Tanya

    Tanya Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    I think the more interesting story is the unseeded Venus Williams to be honest. Despite the fact that she has hardly played any tennis this year I never count her out... She is, to me, one of the most talented female players ever and she has almost always performed well at the US Open.

    1997 - Runner-up (lost to eventual champ Hingis)
    1998 - Semifinalist (lost to eventual champ Davenport)
    1999 - Semifinalist (lost to eventual finalist Hingis)
    2000 - Champion
    2001 - Champion
    2002 - Runner-up (lost to eventual champ Serena)
    2003 - DNP
    2004 - 4th round
    2005 - Quarterfinalist (lost to eventual champ Clijsters after leading a set and a break)
    2006 - DNP
    2007 - Semifinalist (lost to eventual champ Henin in 2 tight sets)
    2008 - Quarterfinalist (lost to eventual champ Serena after having multiple set points in both sets)
    2009 - 4th round (lost to eventual champ Clijsters after winning the second set 6-0)
    2010 - Semifinalist (lost to eventual champ Clijsters in 3 tight sets after winning the first set [6-4, 6-7, 4-6])

    So you never know. The people that have defeated her here have earned it and only twice did she get defeated by a player that did not go on to win the tournament. I think that's a pretty incredible statistic, actually.
     
    #31
  32. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,689
    Location:
    VA Beach
    Venus is a non factor, even given as weak as this field is IMO. She hasn't won a slam away from Wimbledon since 2001 (10 years!), and I don't think she'll do it now. She's much closer to being done as a contender than Serena is.
     
    #32
  33. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Davenport also would have won in 2004 if not for her fluke thigh injury in the semis, so she should have lost to the eventual champion that year too.
     
    #33
  34. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Maybe, but that is what most were saying last year at this time and Venus ended up so nearly winning the U.S Open.
     
    #34
  35. MichaelNadal

    MichaelNadal Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,817
    Location:
    Tuning Up The Band...
    Such a good post! Agree.
     
    #35
  36. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    What is also worth noting is all the people who have ever beaten Venus in the U.S Open are either retired or out of this years event (Clijsters) with the lone exception of Serena.
     
    #36
  37. Tanya

    Tanya Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    I'm not saying that I think she's going to win it, I was merely saying that having her unseeded in the draw is a much bigger worry for the top players than having Serena seeded 28th.
     
    #37
  38. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    WHY?

    Because she's better than those players!!!!

    Did you see the results at Stanford and Canada?

    And seedings are not rankings!!!

    Why doesn't anyone get that?!?!?!
     
    #38
  39. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    I love how the USTA followed the WTA rankings exactly, to seed the women at the US Open. Even though they ahve the prerogative to deviate from the rankings for seeding.

    As anyone with a half a brain (feel free to admit if you don't have even that) knows, Serena Williams is better than, well just about, if not, everyone on the WTA Tour. And as she demonstrated in Stanford and Canada, she's capable of crushing the field.

    So what's the risk of seeding Serena, say #3 (where Clijsters would have been?) or in the top 8? What, Azarenka or Bartoli would be pissed?! It would, ahem, "undermine" the WTA rankings (remind me how many US Open titles Azarenka or Bartoli have. Heck, how many career titles do they have?!)

    And again as everyone knows, the WTA rankings are such a joke, that the USTA follows them blindly shows how massively inept both organizations are!
     
    #39
  40. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    Again, what a pathetic move by the USTA!

    And their excuse?!?!.....they had to consider a formula for all other players if they moved Serena higher? Puh-lease!

    They can do whatever they want.

    So here's what I really hope for:

    Serena draws Venus in the 1R. Sure, it'll be the "blockbuster" promo the USTA will love. But it lasts one night. (And will probably be a dud of a match anyway). Then Serena is paired against Sharapova in the 3R. Serena will of course kill her again. So then the UTSA knocks out 2 heavy drawing cards by the weekend, with their idiotic and blind following of the pathetic WTA ranking system. And they're left with the Bartolis and Azarenkas, and Radwanskas, and the Chockas, and the HoosieWhatsees and HootNannys in the draw. Can't wait to see the massive defection of fans from any of the women's Stadium Court matches they schedule. Because apart from Serena, and for whatever reason Sharapova, no one cares about the women!

    And oh, USTA, are you gonna schedule the women to play after the men at night, as part of your equal employment opportunity ?!? Isn't it gonna be fun seeing the empty stadium for Woz and Azarenka matches!!!
     
    #40
  41. Federerx16

    Federerx16 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    198
    gurl im glad you know how to use the font size function
     
    #41
  42. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,270
    ...but it would be an interesting bookend to their USO finals match from 2002...

    The problem with a Sharapova match-up is that MS is nothing more than a practice session for SW, so there's anticpation to be built on. Moreover, even when Sharapova won a U.S. Open title in 2006, hers was among the lowest ratings of the decade (2.4), proving she's not much of a draw, so her reaching a hypothetical 2nd week meeting with Serena would not matter much, in any case.

    Well, this would happen anywhere; Bartoli's neverending bad attitude inspires fan rejection, while the Azarenkas, et al are fan/media washouts with no character and no much game, so they represent a lose/lose situation.
     
    #42
  43. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,000
    A player don't play tennis doesn't have results, therefore she's cannot be part of equation. The ranking system don't include inactive players. You got to have results, and the only way is to earn it is get her ass on court. And for one year, Serena has little or no results. SHE HAS NO RESULT IN 2010 USO. Ridiculous!
     
    #43
  44. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,930
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Just because you did well in the US Open series doesn't mean you win the US Open. Since the Inception of the US Open series contest only 1 of the 6 ladies has gone on to win her US Open, Kim. In fact Kim is the only one to even make her US Open final. Half of them have lost before the Quarterfinals.

    Wozniacki crushed the entire tour in the US Open series last year, she won every tournament she entered and yet come the US Open she lost. Based on her form going in she was looking like the one to beat and what happened, Zvonareva made mince meat out of her in the SF.

    What of the following do you not get. She was out of tennis for pretty much a year, not playing at all. She earned no points, her first slam back she lost in the 4th round, they can't just overlook that. Based on recent results sure she has momentum, but that doesn't mean she is going to win the title. People on the tour have played all year round and earned all their points to be in the top of the rankings for whatever reason, Would it be fair to seed Serena above current Major champions Kvitova and Li simply because of results at Standford and Canada? They didn't bump Serena up several years ago at the Australian and she went on the win the title. Henin didn't get a bump before her Australian Final run, Kim didn't get one before the US Open...and in the end they all proved those times they were better by what they did. However you can't simply assume its going to happen.

    Also, the problems with the women and the rankings is not the fault of the computerized system. A computer cannot control how much a player deems to show up, when they get injured, their consistency, or anything in terms of their day to day form. Change the system however you want if the players winning the majors can't do anything outside of them its their own faults.
     
    #44
  45. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,000
    Using Dman's logic, Sharapova should be ranked #1 b/c she just won the most recent event(Cincinnati).
     
    #45
  46. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,705
    Location:
    England
    Have the US Open just seeded by ranking?

    If so, that's fair enough.
     
    #46
  47. MotherMarjorie

    MotherMarjorie Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,351
    Appropriately seeded.

    Her last appearance at the US Open didn't go well, and Mother Marjorie suspects that the USTA didn't feel they owed her any favors.

    Mother Marjorie Ann
    Empress of Talk Tennis Warehouse
     
    #47
  48. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    Serena appropriately seeded.....at 28? Meaning should she fulfill her seeding, she bows in the 3R, to Aggie Radwanska ? ! ? <snicker, snicker, nicker>

    Uh, no.

    As far as Serena's last appearance at the US Open.....not going well.....Serena lost in the semis to eventual champ Clijsters. Sure, it was a major meltdown by Serena at the end. But it took a top flight effort by Kim, and that major meltdown, to derail the defending champ.

    But I do agree there were probably some in the USTA who weren't looking to do any favors for Serena.
     
    #48
  49. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    I said, nor insinuated any such thing.

    I advocated Serena Williams, not Maria Sharapova or any other player, should be seeded differently from the rankings.

    That being said, I do believe that very recent results, along with history at each major, should influence seeding.

    But the USTA is clearly willing to let the chips fall where they may as far as the US Open draw.

    Kind of reminds me of 30 years ago. The week prior to the US Open, Andrea Jaeger briefly ascended to #2. So the USTA seeded her #2. Ahead of former champ Tracy Austin, Martina Navratilova, and Hana Mandlikova (who happened to have been in 4 consecutive major finals, including the previous US Open where she beat Jaeger in the semis). The USTA absolutely followed the rankings. And the draw came out, with #5 Mandlikova in the same quarter as #1 Evert (a repeat of the previous US Open final and most recent Wimbledon final), with Navratilova in the same half. Jaeger, as #2 seed, was shocked in the 2R. Not a big surprise. Jaeger had never been in a major final yet.
    This seeding catastrophe was on the heels of Wimbledon that year deviating from the rankings, seeding Hana Mandlikova at #2, despite being ranked #5. Hana was the reigning French and Australian (when it was on grass) champ, and had been in the US Open final the year prior. Tracy Austin, Martina Navratilova, and Andrea Jaeger followed in the seedings. The WTA cried FOUL! And what happened? Jaeger and Austin, who were supposedly "dissed" by being seeded lower than their ranking, didn't live up to their "low" seeding. And Mandlikova got to the final, with a win over #4 seed Navratilova in the semis. So the Wimbledon committee got it right. And what of that organization that cried foul? The WTA. As ever, the WTA got it wrong!
     
    #49
  50. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,689
    Location:
    VA Beach
    She's capable of winning, but she's also capable of losing in the 2nd or 3rd round to some lower ranked player. I don't think she's done anything this season to merit being seeded, and the last time she actually won the the USO was 2001. I understand she's been close and lost to the eventual champ alot, but she's still lost those matches. I don't really think she's a serious contender.
     
    #50

Share This Page