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. --- snip---
.
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 ?
Oh man, hahah, guess that's something Nadal still needs to learn.It is a grass court. Seeding is the most important part. Can't expect a clay court player to understand for you do not seed a clay court
the nadal ?... whining ?!
@vive le beau jeu ! The Legend
Nadal shouldn't be concerned about Wimbledon now while he's competing at the FO. A distraction will lessen his chance to win.
He's too keen on Wimbledon is a testament of his determination/desire to win Wimbledon more than the FO.
exactly. Note that he/she is never mean. Having such a sense of humor is a skill
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!
Neither Nadal or Djoker would ever have gotten past the semis on 80's-90's grass. People who think Djoker has the greatest ROS never saw Agassi attempt to handle Pete's serve on lightning-fact W. grass of those years.
Neither Nadal or Djoker would ever have gotten past the semis on 80's-90's grass. People who think Djoker has the greatest ROS never saw Agassi attempt to handle Pete's serve on lightning-fact W. grass of those years.
Neither Nadal or Djoker would ever have gotten past the semis on 80's-90's grass. People who think Djoker has the greatest ROS never saw Agassi attempt to handle Pete's serve on lightning-fact W. grass of those years.
Or Ivanisevic's
It's not just about the ROS on grass, it's also about the athleticism required to run down all those volleys. Something in which both Nadal and Novak are on another level compared to Andre.
Who himself was hardly impotent against Pete's serve (except in their 1994 F), people forget. Grass favours the athlete and Goran was quite fast on the run.
Their 98 match was a classic, as was their 92 semi.
Nadal has his opinion and often they are to benefit him.
What I don't understand is why he is even bothered to answer this question while he is playing FO.
I haven't rewatched any of them in a while but last time I did I remember enjoying 1995 SF the most. Really felt there was almost nothing separating them in that one, Ivanisevic was such an amazing talent on grass.
Because in the back of his mind, he knows that if Federer wins Wimbledon, then even if Nadal wins RG, he still doesn't make up for the AO final loss. The gap remains at four, and probably means he will never get the chance to close it.
I really don't believe he thinks like that.
I think he does. The last thing he wants is Federer neutralizing all the efforts Nadal has put into the clay, but cancelling his RG title out with a W title of his own. They are competitors of the highest level, and that slam record drives them big time, no matter how much they say it doesn't. They know the war to be the best is entering it's final act, and nobody will be willing to give an inch.
This is true, and by no means is Djokovic not wanting it just as badly as they do. He still believes he can win the slam count record.
I think he does. The last thing he wants is Federer neutralizing all the efforts Nadal has put into the clay, but cancelling his RG title out with a W title of his own. They are competitors of the highest level, and that slam record drives them big time, no matter how much they say it doesn't. They know the war to be the best is entering it's final act, and nobody will be willing to give an inch.
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.
Of course they think about slam count but if Nadal wins RG I don't think he will feel that his win was for nothing just cause Fed wins wimbledon the month after. I think that would be pretty unprofessional and an insult to himself and his professionalism. I don't believe he was thinking in those terms when talking about wimbledon seeds or at all for that matter.
But that is what I believe, just to be clear.
The point in my professional tennis world is to win singles titles at the 4 majors. Connors, Lendl and Borg won several majors. If they choose to skip that's fine. But if you skip you lose credibility that you are the best. Ideally the player who can manage 4 surfaces is the man.
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.
Great. Makes it better. So all Rafa needs to do now is ask for surface based seedings to other slam organizers. He cannot blame Wimbledon, clearly and clearly.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:
I would argue far more against the present seeding system at RG...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 ?
Fed is 35 years old and clay is a young man/grinders surface.
He reached 10 straight grand slam finals across all 4 surfaces in 05-07 then a further 8 between 08-10 across all surfaces during his prime so can clearly manage all 4 surfaces.
Counting players at least 29 years old in all of the OE:
7 won Wimbledon
7 won RG
8 players won past the age of 30.
5 of those wins happened on clay.
The oldest wins happened by Rosewall and Gimeno, both over age 33.
Facts contradict your assumption.
There will be one more player on that list over 30 if Nadal wins this year.
WRONG!!!Maybe overall but the point about grinding is still true and Federer himself has declined on clay with age more than grass/HC.
WRONG!!!
His decline in returning on grass has been horrific, equally true on clay. It's hurt him more on clay because clay was NEVER his best surface.
These are the years Fed's return fell below his career average on clay:
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
It started at around age 28.
Now grass, years below career average:
2008
2009
2010
2011
2014
2015
2016
The difference is that he had two better returning years on grass, 2012 and 2013.
Look at the difference on HCs, years return was below career average:
2008
2009
2012
2013
2014
2017
In other words, return was ABOVE career average in four years, although 2016 is questionable because of so few matches.
And when his return has been lower than his career average, it's not down much.
Are the Nadals still asking for the net to be raised ?Seeding makes no difference to Rafa. He made the final of the AO 2017 ranked 9 and the World #1 & #2 didn't.
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.
No more white balls.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.
LOLWTF needs to be at a different venue every year or two and surface change would be interesting. Nobody cares much about WTF tho. And no it's nothing close to a slam or a masters 1000. It's a round robin 8 player tournament at the end of a long grueling year and most guys are ready to pack it in.
For those who say it's close to a slam it's not even on ESPN or local channels in the states. Slams and some masters 1000s are though. I'd rank the WTF under masters 1000 and over 500 events.
I'm all for except the move the GS location part.
Have an extended grass season. Upgrade Hamburg back to 1000 status but with grass courts. Then have Queens or Halle as a 1000 leading up to Wimbledon. Drop Miami to accommodate this and have IW, Canada, Cincinatti leading up to USO.
Radical changes but would interesting. Overall though I'm happy enough with the tennis calendar.
Fed has nothing to prove. Owes no one anything. Can do what he likes. Any fan saying otherwise is just cryingFed is 35 years old and clay is a young man/grinders surface.
He reached 10 straight grand slam finals across all 4 surfaces in 05-07 then a further 8 between 08-10 across all surfaces during his prime so can clearly manage all 4 surfaces.
As many others have pointed out, if Rafa wasn't hot garbage on grass, he'd be seeded higher. But he IS, so he isn't. Got it? Good.
How do you know that? Did he send you an sms?He is looking out for Delpo.
Injury in 2009? Didn't Rafa skip Wimbledon that year because he felt he wasn't good enough to beat Roger on grass?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.
Of course you would, meanwhile pretty much every player with 3+ slams have won it. Except Rafa. Coincidence? I think notWTF needs to be at a different venue every year or two and surface change would be interesting. Nobody cares much about WTF tho. And no it's nothing close to a slam or a masters 1000. It's a round robin 8 player tournament at the end of a long grueling year and most guys are ready to pack it in.
For those who say it's close to a slam it's not even on ESPN or local channels in the states. Slams and some masters 1000s are though. I'd rank the WTF under masters 1000 and over 500 events.