Wimbledon grass-court seeding formula

[helterskelter]

Here's the rule:

"• Take the ATP Ranking points on 25 June 2018
• Add 100 per cent of the points earned for all grass court tournaments in the past 12 months
• Add 75 per cent of the points earned for the best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that"

By my calculation, that makes the current standings this:

1. Djokovic: 14,325 points [Has #1 seeding for Wimbledon confirmed].
2. Federer: 7,620 points.
3. Nadal: 7,160 points.
4. Anderson: 4,900 points.
5. Zverev: 4,585 points.
6. Nishikori: 4,468 points.
7. Tsitsipas: 4,429 points [or perhaps 4,421 - I'm not sure whether they will count Wimbledon 2017 or Halle 2018 as his "best grass court event of the 12 months before that." Halle 2018 isn't part of his rankings total right now because of other events, but it might still be eligible to be his best grass event of the 12 months prior to Wimbledon 2018].
8. Thiem: 3,945 points.
9. Isner: 3,623 points.
10. Khachanov: 3,138 points.
11. Del Potro: 3,067 points.
12. Cilic: 2,840 points.

Can anyone confirm whether I've calculated this right? I'm not 100% sure I'm interpreting the rule correctly. I read the second clause as saying that the points for which players receive 100% extra are those earned at Wimbledon 2018, Stuttgart 2019, Halle 2019, Queen's 2019, and Hertogenbosch 2019. But it might also include those events from 2018. I don't think it should, as they're not within 12 months of the seeding list being composed, but I'm not entirely sure.

Anyway, if I am right, then I believe that either Federer or more likely Nadal winning Roland Garros would confirm the #2 seed for Wimbledon, but that if Nadal lost in the Roland Garros final, Federer could still get the #2 seed for Wimbledon.

 

[Ann]

Here's the rule:

"• Take the ATP Ranking points on 25 June 2018
• Add 100 per cent of the points earned for all grass court tournaments in the past 12 months
• Add 75 per cent of the points earned for the best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that"

By my calculation, that makes the current standings this:

1. Djokovic: 14,625 points [Has #1 seeding for Wimbledon confirmed].
2. Federer: 7,530 points.
3. Nadal: 7,160 points.
4. Anderson: 4,900 points.
5. Zverev: 4,585 points.
6. Nishikori: 4,468 points.
7. Tsitsipas: 4,429 points [or perhaps 4,421 - I'm not sure whether they will count Wimbledon 2017 or Halle 2018 as his "best grass court event of the 12 months before that." Halle 2018 isn't part of his rankings total right now because of other events, but it might still be eligible to be his best grass event of the 12 months prior to Wimbledon 2018].
8. Thiem: 3,945 points.
9. Isner: 3,623 points.
10. Khachanov: 3,138 points.
11. Del Potro: 3,067 points.
12. Cilic: 2,840 points.

Can anyone confirm whether I've calculated this right? I'm not 100% sure I'm interpreting the rule correctly. I read the second clause as saying that the points for which players receive 100% extra are those earned at Wimbledon 2018, Stuttgart 2019, Halle 2019, Queen's 2019, and Hertogenbosch 2019. But it might also include those events from 2018. I don't think it should, as they're not within 12 months of the seeding list being composed, but I'm not entirely sure.

Anyway, if I am right, then I believe that either Federer or more likely Nadal winning Roland Garros would confirm the #2 seed for Wimbledon, but that if Nadal lost in the Roland Garros final, Federer could still get the #2 seed for Wimbledon.

I want to commend you for your hard work... but that's all I can offer. The ATP ranking system is a mystery, wrapped in an enigma.

 

[helterskelter]

I want to commend you for your hard work... but that's all I can offer. The ATP ranking system is a mystery, wrapped in an enigma.

Thanks. It only took half an hour or so and I enjoyed doing it. I actually went to the rankings to try to check how long Djokovic has the #1 ranking sewn up for, but got sidetracked on this. Anyway, on a quick calculation, Djokovic has #1 guaranteed for the week after Wimbledon even if he loses to Zverev, doesn't play a grass warm up or loses first round in those he plays, and then loses first round at Wimbledon, even if Nadal/Federer win Roland Garros, win grass-court warmups, and win Wimbledon. Djokovic would be 200-300 points ahead in that eventuality.

 

[tacou]

Anderson as No. 4 seed, interesting.

 

[Newballs]

Hell I read the title and thought it was what they used to get the grass to grow.

That is impressive work however...

 

[helterskelter]

Anderson as No. 4 seed, interesting.

Well, there are still lots of points to play for at Roland Garros, let alone in the two warmup weeks. For example, if Thiem were to make the RG final, he'd jump to 4,785 points on this list.

 

[Cashman]

The process you've employed is accurate, but the results of the coming grass court season will have a huge impact on the rankings.

Remember, under the formula, Halle and Queens are like playing two Masters tournaments the day before seedings come out. They always cause a big shuffle in the grass rankings.

 

[NEW_BORN]

And for your next task, determine the probability that Federer will be seeded 2 at Wimbledon.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

http://www.openerarankings.com/Home?Race=3

 

[Luka888]

Just google it. Sorry, it's not that difficult. The formula is there. It is very simple by the way.

 

[NBP]

Federer beating Wawrinka today and winning Halle and I think he would be seeded 2 no matter what Nadal does

 

[helterskelter]

Just google it. Sorry, it's not that difficult. The formula is there. It is very simple by the way.

The formula is there, yes. That's what I used.

 

[helterskelter]

http://www.openerarankings.com/Home?Race=3

Thanks. I don't see how that list can be right, though. They've given everyone 0 points for the year two grass events. But Wimbledon 2017 (or Halle/Queens 2018) are still within the point range, so points earned from the best of those events should be in the Best Y2 column. That's why I give Djokovic 14,325 points, not 14,055 - my tally includes 270 points for the third column (75% of the 360 points he got by making the quarter-finals of Wimbledon 2017).

 

[Cloister]

Thanks. I don't see how that list can be right, though. They've given everyone 0 points for the year two grass events. But Wimbledon 2017 (or Halle/Queens 2018) are still within the point range, so points earned from the best of those events should be in the Best Y2 column. That's why I give Djokovic 14,325 points, not 14,055 - my tally includes 270 points for the third column (75% of the 360 points he got by making the quarter-finals of Wimbledon 2017).

Yeah, it's missing the year 2 points. Otherwise it looks about right. Basically, it looks like if Rafa wins the FO, then Fed needs to win Halle and have Rafa not get many grass tune up points. Presumably by making the semis Fed will pass on Stuttgart this year so no points there, and Rafa may decide getting the 2 seed is worth playing a pre-Wimb grass event.

Of course, if Fed beats Rafa then that pretty much locks up the 2 seed for Fed.

 

[Sudacafan]

Here's the rule:

"• Take the ATP Ranking points on 25 June 2018
• Add 100 per cent of the points earned for all grass court tournaments in the past 12 months
• Add 75 per cent of the points earned for the best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that"

By my calculation, that makes the current standings this:

1. Djokovic: 14,325 points [Has #1 seeding for Wimbledon confirmed].
2. Federer: 7,530 points.
3. Nadal: 7,160 points.
4. Anderson: 4,900 points.
5. Zverev: 4,585 points.
6. Nishikori: 4,468 points.
7. Tsitsipas: 4,429 points [or perhaps 4,421 - I'm not sure whether they will count Wimbledon 2017 or Halle 2018 as his "best grass court event of the 12 months before that." Halle 2018 isn't part of his rankings total right now because of other events, but it might still be eligible to be his best grass event of the 12 months prior to Wimbledon 2018].
8. Thiem: 3,945 points.
9. Isner: 3,623 points.
10. Khachanov: 3,138 points.
11. Del Potro: 3,067 points.
12. Cilic: 2,840 points.

Can anyone confirm whether I've calculated this right? I'm not 100% sure I'm interpreting the rule correctly. I read the second clause as saying that the points for which players receive 100% extra are those earned at Wimbledon 2018, Stuttgart 2019, Halle 2019, Queen's 2019, and Hertogenbosch 2019. But it might also include those events from 2018. I don't think it should, as they're not within 12 months of the seeding list being composed, but I'm not entirely sure.

Anyway, if I am right, then I believe that either Federer or more likely Nadal winning Roland Garros would confirm the #2 seed for Wimbledon, but that if Nadal lost in the Roland Garros final, Federer could still get the #2 seed for Wimbledon.

OK, good thread... but with all respect, how can you possibly think about Wimbledon issues with the upcoming RG Fedal?
Just curious.

 

[BeatlesFan]

For Fed to get the second seed:

1) Rafa doesn't win RG
2) Fed reaches RG final
3) Roger wins Halle

For Rafa to get the 2nd seed, he has to win RG and Fed mustn't win Halle. At least this is what Jim Courier said today while showing a graph of all this.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

I've often wondered why Roland Garros doesn't have it's own seeding system since it is a very unique surface and the European clay season has quite a lengthy lead-in to the clay slam.

 

[jm1980]

Here's the rule:

"• Take the ATP Ranking points on 25 June 2018
• Add 100 per cent of the points earned for all grass court tournaments in the past 12 months
• Add 75 per cent of the points earned for the best grass court tournament in the 12 months before that"

By my calculation, that makes the current standings this:

1. Djokovic: 14,325 points [Has #1 seeding for Wimbledon confirmed].
2. Federer: 7,530 points.
3. Nadal: 7,160 points.
4. Anderson: 4,900 points.
5. Zverev: 4,585 points.
6. Nishikori: 4,468 points.
7. Tsitsipas: 4,429 points [or perhaps 4,421 - I'm not sure whether they will count Wimbledon 2017 or Halle 2018 as his "best grass court event of the 12 months before that." Halle 2018 isn't part of his rankings total right now because of other events, but it might still be eligible to be his best grass event of the 12 months prior to Wimbledon 2018].
8. Thiem: 3,945 points.
9. Isner: 3,623 points.
10. Khachanov: 3,138 points.
11. Del Potro: 3,067 points.
12. Cilic: 2,840 points.

Can anyone confirm whether I've calculated this right? I'm not 100% sure I'm interpreting the rule correctly. I read the second clause as saying that the points for which players receive 100% extra are those earned at Wimbledon 2018, Stuttgart 2019, Halle 2019, Queen's 2019, and Hertogenbosch 2019. But it might also include those events from 2018. I don't think it should, as they're not within 12 months of the seeding list being composed, but I'm not entirely sure.

Anyway, if I am right, then I believe that either Federer or more likely Nadal winning Roland Garros would confirm the #2 seed for Wimbledon, but that if Nadal lost in the Roland Garros final, Federer could still get the #2 seed for Wimbledon.

This is incorrect.

If Nadal wins Roland Garros but plays no grass warmups (which really seems like it will be the case), he will have 8800 grass points => 7945 + 135 (75% of Y2) + 720 (100% of Y1)

This means he could still be surpassed by Fed if he wins Halle (he's not playing Stuttgart), as he would have 8980 grass points => 6620 + 1500 (75% of Y2) + 860 (100% of Y1)

I used to do a spreadsheet with these calculations, but since openerarankings.com started doing it I saw no need to redo the work. If they don't fix their site, I'll put a spreadsheet up.

 

[jm1980]

I want to commend you for your hard work... but that's all I can offer. The ATP ranking system is a mystery, wrapped in an enigma.

The ATP ranking system is actually quite simple... It's the Wimbledon seeding formula that is confusing until you realize what counts as "last 12 months" and "the 12 months before that." Then it becomes rather simple.

 

[JackGates]

The ATP ranking system is actually quite simple... It's the Wimbledon seeding formula that is confusing until you realize what counts as "last year" and "the year before that." Then it becomes rather simple.

No, Wimbledon rankings are more accurate it's the rest of the ranking that is flawed. Wimbledon seeds reflect current form much better. I mean Sampras was always nr.1 seed at RG, so this shows you how the system is flawed and Rafa is rarely ranked nr.1 seed at RG.

 

[jm1980]

No, Wimbledon rankings are more accurate it's the rest of the ranking that is flawed. Wimbledon seeds reflect current form much better. I mean Sampras was always nr.1 seed at RG, so this shows you how the system is flawed and Rafa is rarely ranked nr.1 seed at RG.

I never said which system was more or less accurate... I'm just saying the Wimbledon formula can be confusing at first, which is why every year we get threads like this with people wondering how the seeding is calculated

It's also unclear how a system that takes into consideration points from two years ago can "reflect current form much better" than a system that only considers points won in the last year. For example, if we had a two-time defending Wimbledon champ he would shoot up in the seeding system even if he was playing like absolute dogsh** for the last 11 months

 

[JackGates]

I never said which system was more or less accurate... I'm just saying the Wimbledon formula can be confusing at first, which is why every year we get threads like this with people wondering how the seeding is calculated

It's also unclear how a system that takes into consideration points from two years ago can "reflect current form much better" than a system that only considers points won in the last year. For example, if we had a two-time defending Wimbledon champ he would shoot up in the seeding system even if he was playing like absolute dogsh** for the last 11 months

For whatever reason, the system reflects current form more correctly, because seedings correlate quite nicely with results. Yes, because champions raise the level for big matches, they play badly entire year then they raise their form for slams, it happens often. Fed never played good and yet he is in RG semi. Wawrinka is 29 and he almost made semis. Djokovic last year won W after playing badly all year. Fed and Rafa can be in terrible forms and yet at their best slams they always make it deep.

Yeah, players play badly entire year then raise it for big events, it happens quite often.

 

[Cloister]

This is incorrect.

If Nadal wins Roland Garros but plays no grass warmups (which really seems like it will be the case), he will have 8800 grass points => 7945 + 135 (75% of Y2) + 720 (100% of Y1)

This means he could still be surpassed by Fed if he wins Halle (he's not playing Stuttgart), as he would have 8980 grass points => 6620 + 1500 (75% of Y2) + 860 (100% of Y1)

I used to do a spreadsheet with these calculations, but since openerarankings.com started doing it I saw no need to redo the work. If they don't fix their site, I'll put a spreadsheet up.

The "but" is that Nadal could decide to go play Queens club. Semis would be enough points to put him over the top even if Roger wins Halle. Quarters, I think, would make it a tie.

 

[NBP]

I've often wondered why Roland Garros doesn't have it's own seeding system since it is a very unique surface and the European clay season has quite a lengthy lead-in to the clay slam.

Well that's exactly why. There isn't a Masters or enough tournaments on grass, so they use a system more benificial for grass court specialists. Clay guys get their points over 6 weeks, so no need for a formula for the French

 

[jm1980]

The "but" is that Nadal could decide to go play Queens club. Semis would be enough points to put him over the top even if Roger wins Halle. Quarters, I think, would make it a tie.

Yeah, a tie would also push Nadal ahead of Fed

The question is whether or not he feels like it's worth playing in it to secure a #2 seed

 

[Cloister]

Yeah, a tie would also push Nadal ahead of Fed

The question is whether or not he feels like it's worth playing in it to secure a #2 seed

Well, #3 seed is guaranteed to have a big 3 opponent in their half, while only a 50/50 chance of it with the #2 seed. Gotta practice on grass anyways, so might be worth getting some match practice in to try to lock in the #2 spot.

 

[helterskelter]

This is incorrect.

If Nadal wins Roland Garros but plays no grass warmups (which really seems like it will be the case), he will have 8800 grass points => 7945 + 135 (75% of Y2) + 720 (100% of Y1)

This means he could still be surpassed by Fed if he wins Halle (he's not playing Stuttgart), as he would have 8980 grass points => 6620 + 1500 (75% of Y2) + 860 (100% of Y1)

I used to do a spreadsheet with these calculations, but since openerarankings.com started doing it I saw no need to redo the work. If they don't fix their site, I'll put a spreadsheet up.

Right, I had mistakenly given Federer only 75% of the points he got from Wimbledon 2018. I've updated the OP.

By my calculations, right now they stand like this:

Nadal = 7,520.

Federer = 7,980.

Does that seem right to you?

 

[weakera]

Cannot imagine Rafa plays a grass tourney before Wimbledon.

 

[icedevil0289]

Well that's exactly why. There isn't a Masters or enough tournaments on grass, so they use a system more benificial for grass court specialists. Clay guys get their points over 6 weeks, so no need for a formula for the French

this clay season in particular is feeling quite long

 

[jm1980]

Right, I had mistakenly given Federer only 75% of the points he got from Wimbledon 2018. I've updated the OP.

By my calculations, right now they stand like this:

Nadal = 7,520.

Federer = 7,980.

Does that seem right to you?

Yes. Those are good starting points. Now just add their RG F/W points and double their 2019 grass points up until Queen's and Halle

 

[Cloister]

Yes. Those are good starting points. Now just add their RG F/W points and double their 2019 grass points up until Queen's and Halle

He'll also have to take out last year's Stuttgart and Halle points. His figure is like the "Live" total, so will change with adding point and dropping points. Yours is like the "Race" total that just needs new points added.

 

[helterskelter]

He'll also have to take out last year's Stuttgart and Halle points. His figure is like the "Live" total, so will change with adding point and dropping points. Yours is like the "Race" total that just needs new points added.

No, I already took out the Stuttgart and Halle points for last year. Here is how I get Federer at 7,980, for example:

1. ATP Points = 6,120 [5,950 points at start of this week + 720 points won at Roland Garros so far - 550 points won at Stuttgart and Halle last year = 6,120]
2. Year 1 Grass Points = 360 [100% of 360 points won at Wimbledon 2018]
3. Year 2 Grass Points = 1,500 [75% of 2,000 points won at Wimbledon 2017]

4. Total points = 7,980

 

[jm1980]

He'll also have to take out last year's Stuttgart and Halle points. His figure is like the "Live" total, so will change with adding point and dropping points. Yours is like the "Race" total that just needs new points added.

He already did

 

[Badabing888]

So Roger has to win today to take the number 2 seeding at W?

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

So Roger has to win today to take the number 2 seeding at W?

Yes

 

[Tenez!]

What happens now?

If Federer was 2nd seed in the half with Anderson to take his revenge (like against Tsonga earlier!) that would be exquisite.

 

[Meles]

http://www.openerarankings.com/Home?Race=3

Thank you. Some of us have been watching this for some time.

 

[EloQuent]

What happens now?

If Federer was 2nd seed in the half with Anderson to take his revenge (like against Tsonga earlier!) that would be exquisite.

Have you been following Andersons form lately? Highly unlikely he makes the SF.

 

[jm1980]

There will be three seeded Serbs in the draw (Djokovic, Lajovic, and Djere)

Hoping Novak gets Kei in the QF and Anderson in the semis

 

[Tenez!]

Have you been following Andersons form lately? Highly unlikely he makes the SF.

He has a 70% win rate since last Wimbledon (29-12), and a 75% win rate (9-3) this year.

 

[tennisaddict]

There will be three seeded Serbs in the draw (Djokovic, Lajovic, and Djere)

Hoping Novak gets Kei in the QF and Anderson in the semis

Let us hope they throw in Karlovic, Kyrgios, Tsitsipas and Berretini . I don't believe any other players need to even play this tournament.

 

[EloQuent]

He has a 70% win rate since last Wimbledon (29-12), and a 75% win rate (9-3) this year.

Easy to have only 3 losses when you only play 4 tournaments!

Since winning maharashtra he has
- lost to tiafoe in R2 of AO
- withdrew from IW
- got bageled in the QF Miami
- took off the entire clay season (either arm or shoulder injury)
- lost to Simon in R2 queens, after struggling against norrie.

You think that's a good sign for making a SF at a slam? Knock yourself out, I'm not going to argue with you. Let's see.

 

[Tenez!]

Easy to have only 3 losses when you only play 4 tournaments!

Since winning maharashtra he has
- lost to tiafoe in R2 of AO
- withdrew from IW
- got bageled in the QF Miami
- took off the entire clay season (either arm or shoulder injury)
- lost to Simon in R2 queens, after struggling against norrie.

You think that's a good sign for making a SF at a slam? Knock yourself out, I'm not going to argue with you. Let's see.

I see your point. I imagine the question is what matters most: number of wins or rate of victories.
Zverev is at 16-11 since Miami, which is a novice winning rate. Would you put more stock in him?

 

[EloQuent]

I see your point. I imagine the question is what matters most: number of wins or rate of victories.
Zverev is at 16-11 since Miami, which is a novice winning rate. Would you be more stock in him?

Zverev sucks in slams and is in lousy shape. I wouldn't expect much from him either. There's no hard science to this, just look at the career and current form, idk. Then again, maybe this is when it all comes together for him, who knows.