Nadal questions Wimbledon's seeding system

V

VladBurn

Rookie
https://thesportsrush.com/rafael-nadal-questions-wimbledons-seeding-process/

Players who have better previous records on grass are ranked higher than those who struggled.

What's so bad about it ? It's obvious that if someone is number 10 on the ATP it is because he deserves to be there, but that's the ranking you get after playing on multiple type of courts and not just one.
Wimbledon is played on grass and I dont see anything bad in ranking players the way they do.

Your opinions ?
 
Big_Dangerous

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
VladBurn said:
https://thesportsrush.com/rafael-nadal-questions-wimbledons-seeding-process/

Players who have better previous records on grass are ranked higher than those who struggled.

What's so bad about it ? It's obvious that if someone is number 10 on the ATP it is because he deserves to be there, but that's the ranking you get after playing on multiple type of courts and not just one.
Wimbledon is played on grass and I dont see anything bad in ranking players the way they do.

Your opinions ?
Click to expand...

He wasn't complaining back in 2006-2010, when he had good results on the grass, save for the 2009 season he missed due to injury. So now that he's had really mediocre results on grass the past few years, he's salty about the seeding process... Sounds like someone who makes excuses for losing, like oh I was injured, off my meds, blah blah blah. Then when they win, it's like nothing was ever wrong.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
It's an ongoing debate and will undoubtedly rumble on. Other former top players have questioned the seeding policy too and I believe some of them eg. Muster refused to play Wimbledon because they were seeded much lower than their world rankings would have warranted. The fact that there are so few tournaments on grass compared to the other 2 surfaces has always been a strong argument for Wimbledon's unique seeding system.

For what its worth, although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think Wimbledon should just fall into line with the other 3 Slams and apply the world rankings to their seedings policy. 4 of the top 5 ranked players in the world are all former Wimbledon champions anyway!
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
It's not fair that only Wimbledon uses it's own formula. However, Rafa shouldn't worry about that; he's had some very good draws despite his seeding coming back from injury. Wimbledon will never change, everything there seems to be set in stone.

Gustavo Kuerten boycotted Wimbledon when he was World #1 but was seeded lower.
 
skip1969

skip1969

G.O.A.T.
i'm not sure there is anything to say except that the slams are their own entities. and as such, they can mandate whatever they choose to. and if you don't agree, you're free to skip it.

even though they've ruined their grass to the point that it doesn't play like grass anymore, they can still claim the right to use a more subjective equation for determining their seeds because their surface is unique and the grass season so short.

i got no problem with that.

rafa should remember the days when the players whined like b*tches about there only being 16 seeds and (potentially) having tough first-round matches . . . and the slams caved . . . and now we "protect" 32 seeds . . . and have pretty much sucked the life out of the first week of every slam.

i mean, you can't have everything.
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
Artist said:
Given how there are barely any opportunities for players who are good on grass to get many points on said surface to up their ranking (which is different for other surfaces), I feel the wimbledon seeding system is fair.
Click to expand...
This.

Also - other changes Rafa has proposed in that past, that would benefit him: More clay, WTF on clay, 2 year ranking system (making it a lot harder for the lost boys), only 1 serve (iirc, not 100 % sure on this one) etc., etc.
skip1969 said:
rafa should remember the days when the players whined like b*tches about there only being 16 seeds and (potentially) having tough first-round matches . . . and the slams caved . . . and now we "protect" 32 seeds . . . and have pretty much sucked the life out of the first week of every slam.

i mean, you can't have everything.
Click to expand...
Also this.

Finally, this is poor journalism and outright wrong:
" In some cases a very high ranked player might not even be seeding and thus would stand at a disadvantage despite the high rank. "
A very high ranked sounds top-10 or top-15 at worst. Can anyone name any top 20-player, who hasn't been seeded at Wimbledon? I doubt there are any top-25 players who didn't get a seed.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
Mainad said:
It's an ongoing debate and will undoubtedly rumble on. Other former top players have questioned the seeding policy too and I believe some of them eg. Muster refused to play Wimbledon because they were seeded much lower than their world rankings would have warranted. The fact that there are so few tournaments on grass compared to the other 2 surfaces has always been a strong argument for Wimbledon's unique seeding system.

For what its worth, although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think Wimbledon should just fall into line with the other 3 Slams and apply the world rankings to their seedings policy. 4 of the top 5 ranked players in the world are all former Wimbledon champions anyway!
Click to expand...
Why should Wimbledon fall into line and not the other way around? My thanks to a poster elsewhere for providing a snapshot of the actual rule that applies to how slams rank entrants:

amQKW5T.png


In other words, Wimbledon is well within ITF rules "shall be a primary, but not sole basis for such selection"
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Chanwan said:
This.

Also - other changes Rafa has proposed in that past, that would benefit him: More clay, WTF on clay, 2 year ranking system (making it a lot harder for the lost boys), only 1 serve (iirc, not 100 % sure on this one) etc., etc.
Click to expand...
What about the WTF at his Academy in Mallorca on clay?
 
skip1969

skip1969

G.O.A.T.
clayqueen said:
It's not fair that only Wimbledon uses it's own formula.
Click to expand...
actually, it's totally fair. because it's their show. kinda like when your parents say, "our house, our rules. you want to do what you like, go out and get a job and your own place, and you can do whatever you please." you may not like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't fair.

clayqueen said:
Wimbledon will never change, everything there seems to be set in stone.
Click to expand...
that's a lazy attitude. and also not true. i've been watching tennis for 30 years and wimbledon has changed . . . a lot. but i know you know that, so i won't bother giving you examples.
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
skip1969 said:
actually, it's totally fair. because it's their show. kinda like when your parents say, "our house, our rules. you want to do what you like, go out and get a job and your own place, and you can do whatever you please." you may not like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't fair.

that's a lazy attitude. and also not true. i've been watching tennis for 30 years and wimbledon has changed . . . a lot. but i know you know that, so i won't bother giving you examples.
Click to expand...
Rafa is just looking out for Delpo who is ranked 30, only reached the 3rd round in 2016 having just returned from injury and was absent in 2015 due to injury so hardly has any points to add in the formula so might end up not being seeded.
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
skip1969 said:
that's a lazy attitude. and also not true. i've been watching tennis for 30 years and wimbledon has changed . . . a lot. but i know you know that, so i won't bother giving you examples.
Click to expand...
I've been watching much longer than you. Anyway, give me an example of what has changed apart from the roofs on CC and No 1 court, and the new No 2 court.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
Before RG, a player who may have been ranked in the top 10 but outside the top four had a chance to earn something like 3500 points to improve their standing and be ranked in the top four; a similar player with grass ability and in a similar situation would not be able to do the same because the maximum points available are from one 250 and one 500, (just 750 points) there being not a single grass master.

That's what most everybody knows the Wimbledon seeding system is meant to counter and provide some reasonalbe equity.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
clayqueen said:
I've been watching much longer than you. Anyway, give me an example of what has changed apart from the roofs on CC and No 1 court, and the new No 2 court.
Click to expand...
You've been watching Wimbledon so long and never noticed , read or heard that the type of grass used has changed drastically... you haven't noticed that the grass is no longer lightning fast... wow!
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
pame said:
Before RG, a player who may have been ranked in the top 10 but outside the top four had a chance to earn something like 3500 points to improve their standing and be ranked in the top four; a similar player with grass ability and in a similar situation would not be able to do the same because the maximum points available are from one 250 and one 500, (just 750 points) there being not a single grass master.

That's what most everybody knows the Wimbledon seeding system is meant to counter and provide some reasonalbe equity.
Click to expand...
A tennis player is a tennis player. Anyone who is good on grass doesn't need a high seeding to come through. The two finalists at the AO 2017 were seeded 17 & 9.
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
pame said:
You've been watching Wimbledon so long and never noticed , read or heard that the type of grass used has changed drastically... you haven't noticed that the grass is no longer lightning fast... wow!
Click to expand...
So I'm told. I've never stepped on the Wimbledon courts so it's not for me to say.
 
skip1969

skip1969

G.O.A.T.
clayqueen said:
Rafa is just looking out for Delpo who is ranked 30, only reached the 3rd round in 2016 having just returned from injury and was absent in 2015 due to injury so hardly has any points to add in the formula so might end up not being seeded.
Click to expand...
how does he know who is getting seeded what? the seeds have yet to come out. plus. it's for someone like delpo that the committee can use their discretion.
 
skip1969

skip1969

G.O.A.T.
pame said:
You've been watching Wimbledon so long and never noticed , read or heard that the type of grass used has changed drastically... you haven't noticed that the grass is no longer lightning fast... wow!
Click to expand...
lol. i was about to say the same thing. hmmmm . . . what's changed in 30 years? how bout the grass. minor thing.
 
Jackuar

Jackuar

Hall of Fame
I agree with Rafa here. Why should Wimbledon alone have its own system? To keep it fair, make all 4 grandslams follow Wimbledon system. It's ridiculous to think that Murray had below par clay season last year but still ranked seed 1 for FO now just because he played better on later hard courts. ((Head scratch on that logic)).

You're right Rafa. You should be No. 3 seed for FO, Fed likewise as he deserves for Wimbledon and Djokovic, Murray for their respective strong slams.
 
Terenigma

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
Artist said:
Given how there are barely any opportunities for players who are good on grass to get many points on said surface to up their ranking (which is different for other surfaces), I feel the wimbledon seeding system is fair.
Click to expand...

This. Also didn't Wawrinka get seeded #5 a couple of years ago even tho both Murray and Federer had less points than him but they got seeded higher due to superior results on grass? I don't remember him complaining about it then, maybe he did but even if he did. It has happened to players, you deal with it.

Lets just add this to the list of things Nadal complains about only when HE is the victim of it.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
Jackuar said:
I agree with Rafa here. Why should Wimbledon alone have its own system? To keep it fair, make all 4 grandslams follow Wimbledon system. It's ridiculous to think that Murray had below par clay season last year but still ranked seed 1 for FO now just because he played better on later hard courts. ((Head scratch on that logic)).

You're right Rafa. You should be No. 3 seed for FO, Fed likewise as he deserves for Wimbledon and Djokovic, Murray for their respective strong slams.
Click to expand...
But Jackuar, the ITF rules are already in place for the tournament committees to adjust what they wish, if they wish. Let me post again:

amQKW5T.png
 
2

2HBH-DTL

Guest
clayqueen said:
A tennis player is a tennis player. Anyone who is good on grass doesn't need a high seeding to come through. The two finalists at the AO 2017 were seeded 17 & 9.
Click to expand...

since the finalists of the AO this year were seeded 17 and 9 then what's the point of seeding?

time to /endthread

giphy.gif
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Mainad said:
It's an ongoing debate and will undoubtedly rumble on. Other former top players have questioned the seeding policy too and I believe some of them eg. Muster refused to play Wimbledon because they were seeded much lower than their world rankings would have warranted. The fact that there are so few tournaments on grass compared to the other 2 surfaces has always been a strong argument for Wimbledon's unique seeding system.

For what its worth, although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think Wimbledon should just fall into line with the other 3 Slams and apply the world rankings to their seedings policy. 4 of the top 5 ranked players in the world are all former Wimbledon champions anyway!
Click to expand...

the reason is because grass season is very short unlike clay and hard which are adequately represented - hence grass points are not adequately reflected in the ATP rankings.

the point about Muster is entirely outdated. At that time, it was solely based on grass court performances...now its a mix of ATP points and grass court performances - which is a good system.

and it isn't just about the top 5 players, its about the top 32 seeds.
 
D

deBroglie

Professional
Wimbledon should stick with their current seeding system. Almost all tournaments 3 months before the AO are on hard courts, as are the clay court tournaments before the French Open. Before Wimbledon, a player can play 2 grass court tournaments, which won't be enough to sufficiently increase their ranking. I'm sure Nadal understands this too.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
@Jacuarof course what you're arguing is not the same as what rafa is arguing. He says in that article: "
"Is a controversial thing, because when you are fourth in the world it's because you deserve to be fourth in the world," he told a media conference at Roland Garros. "When you are first, you deserve to be first. And when you are 33, you are 33 and you are not seeded."

And it is easy to see where this sudden concern is coming from, if you look at the Wimby projected seedings here:

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

Nadal is currently ranked No. 3 in the ATP rankings, but he is 5th in the Wimbleson seeding because of their formula (which he has had no quarrel with in the many previous years he has played there). However, depending on how Wawrinka and Raonic do, there is a chance Nadal will not be ranked Top 4, and that, I venture to suggest, is what this sudden concern about how Wimbledon seeds is really about
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
abmk said:
oh and again, rafa is a selfish whiner ..... 2 year ranking system, higher net clearance ( was that his or Toni's idea?), more CC tournaments, WTF on clay , now this one ...
Click to expand...
Have you noticed no more lobbying for 2 year system since he's no longer no. 1? A 2-year system now would ensure that Murray stay No. 1 for at least another year... lol (nor did the cry for the 2 year system to come when Fed was No. 1 and so far ahead of No. 2)
 
Last edited:
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
clayqueen said:
What about the WTF at his Academy in Mallorca on clay?
Click to expand...
would only be fair
pame said:
Have you noticed no more lobbying for 2 year system since he's no longer no. 1? A 2-year system now would ensure that Murray stay No. 1 for at least another year... lol (nor did the cry for the 2 year system to come when Fed was No. 1 and so far ahead of No. 2)
Click to expand...
Wouldn't Djoko be close to or no. 1. with a 2 year ranking system? Otherwise, spot on
 
T

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Instead of whining, Nadal should be happy that many things went his way. Tennis courts have slowed down which Nadal benefitted immensely. His success is largely contributed to the ideal conditions that suit his grinding/defensive style. Would he have won Wimbledon had the grass speed remains the same? Probably not.

Also Nadal gets to play 3 Master 1000 on his favorite surface when there's no Master on grass.

The players that excel on fast courts get the raw deal.
 
skip1969

skip1969

G.O.A.T.
clayqueen said:
Seeding makes no difference to Rafa. He made the final of the AO 2017 ranked 9 and the World #1 & #2 didn't.
Click to expand...
exactly. he was the higher seed in the final . . . and he STILL lost. so he really shouldn't worry too much about where the wimbledon committee seeds him. because obviously, it doesn't make much of a difference to him.

except that it matters so little to him that he thought he'd mention it anyway. you know, on the off chance that it actually does matter to him.
 
C

Chadillac

Guest
It was a good rule when wimbledon was played on grass. Its not needed today because of the surface speed.
 
D

Deleted member 735320

Guest
I think they should scrap the computer altogether. The points race is all that should matter and it re-sets every Jan 1st. They should also have the seasons leading up to the majors count solely for the major. The French Open should base their seeds only on clay events played in the current calendar year. That way guys like Cuevas and Schwartzman would be seeded and Stan would barely if even seeded. It would also have sent prima donna Roger the message that IF he had played RG he would have been unseeded. That way if he won he would have earned it and sent a strong message.

On grass at Wimbledon it is annoying every year to see top players "upset" in the early rounds. They had no business being seeded.

I still think a major overhaul needs to be done and basically the 4 majors are the ones that count and the back up singers at the 1000, 500 and 250 level matter but not nearly as much. Each major should be spaced out evenly throughout the calendar. They will be the final 2 weeks of the 10-12 week cycle. That allows at least 1 weeks off between cycles. The US Open should be moved to TX in warmer weather for the fall. Indian Wells and Miami should join the US Open Series.

The Asian swing should be the preludes to the Aussie Open in a PanPacific Series. Include Chenai and the NZ and minor Aussie stuff here.

The biggest change is that Newport will be moved BEFORE Wimbledon.

I am open to the 4 majors being completely relocated from Melbourne, Paris, London and NYC. After all it is the caliber of the competition and the 3 of 5 sets that matter in the majors not the location.

They can globe trot but no clay court tourneys during the hard, indoor or grass seasons. Davis Cup can go away along with Olympic Tennis and while we are at it World Team Tennis. More grass and carpet may be better for the body than too much cement.

I know this will NEVER happen but I think it would solve a lot of issues and allow a player who is a specialist to earn a living.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
pame said:
Have you noticed no more lobbying for 2 year system since he's no longer no. 1? A 2-year system now would ensure that Murray stay No. 1 for at least another year... lol (nor did the cry for the 2 year system to come when Fed was No. 1 and so far ahead of No. 2)
Click to expand...

didn't really follow that part much, but a 2 year ranking system is ludicrous anyways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

clayqueen
Wimbledon seeding - 2017
2 3
Replies
102
Views
12K
clayqueen
clayqueen
Sport
Federer will be seeded #5 and will likely face either Nadal or Djokovic in the quarterfinals of Wimbledon 2020
2 3
Replies
117
Views
5K
SonnyT
S
tusharlovesrafa
John McEnroe says Rafael Nadal should be No. 1 seed at French Open
2
Replies
90
Views
12K
beernutz
beernutz
clayqueen
Wimbledon seeding formula-one rule for women another for men
Replies
47
Views
2K
Chadillac
C
marc45
Wimbledon Seedings
2
Replies
92
Views
8K
Noleberic123
Noleberic123
Top