Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by formula16, Aug 24, 2011.
Move along. Nothing to see here. Please, nothing to see here.
The top two seeds deserve an easy draw, unless it's Nadal and Djokovic (jk). It used to be that the top seed didn't have to play until the finals
A long time ago, the defending champion would just play in the final. I know Wimbledon was that way, not sure about the US championships.
It was, I believe. Not sure, though
The challenge format was used for the first 30 years or so.
BTW, the article cites some curious anomalies. The analogy to flipping "heads" 18 straight times is disturbing to me.
The draws are certainly not manipulated in any way. I mean, it's not like we get Djokovic/Federer and Nadal/Murray almost every slam.
You, sir, as a rookie, are mastering the wry TIC sarcasm necessary to endure in the TT forums. Well done, rook!
They probably are. Welcome to the real world.
See exerpt from August 26, 1996 article:
Yevgeny Kafelnikov, seeded seventh in the US Open despite being ranked fourth in the world, withdrew from the Grand Slam event, which starts today, in protest over what he calls unfair seeding practices.
The US Association dropped the 22-year-old Russian three places from his world ranking despite his winning the French Open.
"I was shocked when I saw what they did to me," Kafelnikov said. "I deserve to be seeded No 4. I won a Grand Slam tournament and consider myself a good hard-court player. I am disappointed, but I am sending a warning."
The draw for the 128-player men's field - minus the 16 seeds - was made in a non-public meeting on Tuesday night. The next morning, at a public ceremony, the seeded players were announced and their names were selected from a cup to determine exactly where they would be placed in the draw.
In an unprecedented move sparked by the threat of a players' boycott, the USTA redid the draw on Thursday for the year's final Grand Slam tournament. "They basically set up the draw in favour of American players," Kafelnikov said.
This is nice - "the draw was made in a non-public meeting", ostensibly to ensure proper randomness! The USTA sux.
I dont know where this came from article wise someone posted in the other thread, but this is the all the proof that was ever needed. Case closed a long time ago. What I can't believe is that people actually believe the draws are legit.
I will also add, The director that is interviewed. He says the USO has nothing to gain, yet we know thats a lie. The top seeds are needed at the end of the tourney or people don't watCH. If that happens a few years in row how much revenue are they going to lose from the Sponsors? The other thing is he says USTA would never do that...... maybe he meant again?
The USTA had no problem keeping Agassi's drug confession hushed. I'm sure they would have no trouble with a lot of other things.
Never seen that format before...
If Fed and Nadal are not in the same half then there will be no doubt.
I don't want to believe it. Therefore I choose to remain naive and ignorant.
LOL. Dunno about USTA, but I am sure Wim draw was completely random, fair, even and balanced too. I am sure that was why Woz, yet again, as she has been seeminly getting lots of in the past couple of years, got a complete cupcake GS draw to walk (until semis and Pova) whereas I am sure that Sue Barker's supposed comment about how the 2011 FO final "wasn't the final we hoped for" (who is "we" by the way?) wasn't why the FO champion got the Birmingham champion in the second round, which just happened to be played on indoor grass when it wasn't raining. I am sure that the fact centre court is the one with the roof has nothing to do with why a big server has an advantage indoors (check her serving stats for when the roof was on as opposed to when it was off), which was why that match was scheduled there. hahaha
Read the original article, which said the USO was the only one that was fishy. The other slams didn't have an increased probability of easy matches for top seeds compared to the expected.
Ah, so that explains how Roger won 5 USO's and also confirms that the French tried hard to knock Nadal out.
THis gets murkier day by day.
I think they need to look at grass records too, Wimby is more of a specialized surface than any other, using ranking to determine legitimacy of the draw is wrong. They need to look a little deeper.
Separate names with a comma.