Hard to believe that Henin and Serena are AGAIN slated to meet up in the quarters when most people believe this should be the actual finals. I realize that Serena's ranking isn't high enough but come on please. And what's with Shriekapova always seeming to have a cake walk draw to the finals, I mean do her looks really raise the tv ratings THAT much?
U.S. Open Draw Fixed
- Thread starter snapple
- Start date
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
She played Venus in the 4th Round of Wimbledon, that was a pretty tough draw. here she has Vaidisova in the 4th round, probably the toughest lower seed after Venus.
They do. I think CBS is still weeping over the ratings for '03/'04/'05 womens finals.
norcal
Legend
Barry will find a way to, you can bank on that.
Who is Barry? Sorry I don´t watch american TV.
DashaandSafin
Hall of Fame
Haha I remeber arguing with them a year or two ago about Roddick's draws...amusing stuff. Barry would never answer the point you presented to him and Chadwixx would always threaten to ignore you. I wonder if they're still here around this board...haven't seen them in awhile.
masha4ever#1
Semi-Pro
anyone jealous??
Not her looks, but her powerful and emotional play. BTW I think there a lot more people who enjoy watching Maria's play than those of the stuck up and dislikable Williams' sisters.
Masha #1 !!!!!!!!!!!
princess bossass
Semi-Pro
They drew numbers. It came up how it came up. Step away from the kool-aid.
P
poplar
Guest
amen to that. this board of idiots will always find sth about complain about the draw. there are no tough draw if you are good enough.
the funny thing is, if federer draws blake or other hard hitter, it's consider a cakewalk draw, if nadal or others draw them, it's a tough draw. what a bunch of cry babies.
mileslong
Professional
i don't believe the williams should play in the finals, if they want higher seeds then play a full schedule of events and quit crying about it, rankings are rankings...if serena wants a higher ranking then she needs to play more events and quit modeling for cow fancy magazine...
masha4ever#1
Semi-Pro
If you feel the draw for Serena was unfair then why not just give her a Bye for all the round till to the Final and so goes for the others except Sharapova. Fair enough........what do you think, happy
Well i think he'll like your idea. But it wouldn'Tt keep Masha from winning the US Open
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
No, that's it. And there are witnesses watching the proceedings. The conspiracy theorists are good for a laugh.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
seedings
for me , the seedings should reflect the likelihood of winning an event.they are also useful for avoiding daft early round matchups. some people say the draw doesn't matter. if you want to win you should be prepared for any matchup. could those folks justify a federer-nadal R1 matchup?
the us open womens draw shows yet again, in my view, the need for discretionary seedings, not strict computer rankings. for example ,who is more likely to win? venus (seeded 12) or daniella hantuchova(seeded 9), no disrespect to daniella, but even she would admit that venus is much more likely to win title.also henin, jelena, ana, serena,venus, in same half of draw.
for me , the seedings should reflect the likelihood of winning an event.they are also useful for avoiding daft early round matchups. some people say the draw doesn't matter. if you want to win you should be prepared for any matchup. could those folks justify a federer-nadal R1 matchup?
the us open womens draw shows yet again, in my view, the need for discretionary seedings, not strict computer rankings. for example ,who is more likely to win? venus (seeded 12) or daniella hantuchova(seeded 9), no disrespect to daniella, but even she would admit that venus is much more likely to win title.also henin, jelena, ana, serena,venus, in same half of draw.
Alexandros
Professional
This is true for the person who goes to win the title. But if say in the extreme example Federer and Nadal were to face each other in an early round match and Federer were to win and then go on to claim the title. No difference for Federer if he had faced Nadal in that round or the last right? Well what about all the other potential opponents Nadal could have had a chance to face if he had been seeded away from Federer? They've all advanced further than they should have and Nadal is the unrewarded for his hard working in getting his ranking.
re scineram
if you are old enough to remember, dimwit, the seedings committee of wimbledon for example used to allocate 16 seeds using their rankings as a starting point for the seeding and, at their discretion, give players a higher or lower seed according to factors such as ,proven ability on grass.
if you are old enough to remember, dimwit, the seedings committee of wimbledon for example used to allocate 16 seeds using their rankings as a starting point for the seeding and, at their discretion, give players a higher or lower seed according to factors such as ,proven ability on grass.
skip1969
G.O.A.T.
i'm dating myself here . . . but when i was a teen (and my bad for assuming most of the folks on this board are young) and the draw came out for a slam (cos my nerdy-*ss cared even back then) . . . and i talked about the draw with my fellow tennis nerds . . . if someone we liked got a tough draw, we said "bummer, man." if someone we liked got an easy draw, we said "cool!"
but i don't ever remember us sitting around by the back fence (behind the baseline with the big shady tree, takin' a break from the hot summer sun) and saying to ourselves, "man, this sh*t is rigged!"
but then again, what do i know?
these conspiracy threads border on the surreal sometimes, but they ARE good for a few chuckles. thank you, norcal and princess bossass.
but i don't ever remember us sitting around by the back fence (behind the baseline with the big shady tree, takin' a break from the hot summer sun) and saying to ourselves, "man, this sh*t is rigged!"
but then again, what do i know?
these conspiracy threads border on the surreal sometimes, but they ARE good for a few chuckles. thank you, norcal and princess bossass.
It would be fixed if they arranged it so that Henin and Williams met in the final. Get your story straight.
Slazenger
Professional
It really doesn't matter. Pova is not defending. Her game right now sucks. At present can't beat Henin, Venus, Serena.
She would have to work VERY hard to win against Ana or Jelena.
However, Maria's ultimate motivation is on the line. 2.4Mil. That alone might propel her dismal serve another 10mph.
My prediction is Venus is going to win. I want to see Venus-Henin play.
US Open Men's Draw: Federer (the golden boy) is drawn together with numbers 4,5,6 and 9. All his regular customer's. Nadal and Djokovic the only player's who present a REAL THREAT to his quest for the title are placed as usually together along with number's 7 and 8.
Now could anyone here please explain to me EXACTLY how the US Open Seeding's Commitee defines the draw?
In last Wimbedon, Djokovic i think was 4th on the ATP list and he was drawn with Nadal as was the case in this year's French Open. In Australian Open he played against Federer in the third round i think but then he wasn't the formidable force he became later on.
If it is left solely to every Commitee's discretion to arrange the tournament's draw, depending on subjective conjectures of the type such as a player's proven abilty etc., then all this should at least cast a doubt on the fairness of the draw, considering the fact that if something happens in succession it is not thought anymore to be a coincidence.
Now could anyone here please explain to me EXACTLY how the US Open Seeding's Commitee defines the draw?
In last Wimbedon, Djokovic i think was 4th on the ATP list and he was drawn with Nadal as was the case in this year's French Open. In Australian Open he played against Federer in the third round i think but then he wasn't the formidable force he became later on.
If it is left solely to every Commitee's discretion to arrange the tournament's draw, depending on subjective conjectures of the type such as a player's proven abilty etc., then all this should at least cast a doubt on the fairness of the draw, considering the fact that if something happens in succession it is not thought anymore to be a coincidence.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
So the fix is in. I thought so.
Kidding. The 4,5,6 ... 7,8 deal is done ''randomly''. Seriously, after 1 and 2 are placed, then 3 and 4 are placed randomly either at the top of the second qtr or the bottom of the third qtr. Then 5 - 8 are placed randomly at the tops and bottom of the sixteenths. The 9-16 are placed similarly.
Check it out on just about any related website. Or go play a tournament with fairly large draws and ask the director.
Kidding. The 4,5,6 ... 7,8 deal is done ''randomly''. Seriously, after 1 and 2 are placed, then 3 and 4 are placed randomly either at the top of the second qtr or the bottom of the third qtr. Then 5 - 8 are placed randomly at the tops and bottom of the sixteenths. The 9-16 are placed similarly.
Check it out on just about any related website. Or go play a tournament with fairly large draws and ask the director.
It is very difficult to me to believe that such important things are left to "random". And if it is "random" then we have a repeated coincidence. Thrice in a row. Work out the odds. Let's say however that i stick by your story. Now, how would you explain the following:
Federer's draw up until 1/8 final: Qualifier, Qualifier, Qualifier, Qualifier, Qualifier, Qualifier, Isner, Nieminen.
Nadal's draw up until 1/8 final: Jones, Sweeting, Tipsarevic, Hernandez, Tsonga, Henman, Tursunov.
Do these fields of players seem to you as rather equal, or even slightly favorable for the golden boy, reflecting his status as number 1 compared to Nadal's place in number 2?
Or is there a huge difference?
And now look at Djokovic's draw up until 1/8 final: Ancic (CRO! 1st Round), Stepanek, Berlocq, Mahut, Del Potro, Hartfield, Melzer.
And what about this draw? Is it a fair draw for number 3 when number 1 is given such a royal treatment? Not even one qualifier for Federer's rivals?
Is all this again a "random" coincidence?
Some may say these are early matches so it won't matter. I would reply that in a grand slam a player must go in two weeks through seven matches of five sets. Everything does make a difference. That's why a player's total court spend time in the latter stages is considered an important statistical figure.
Fedace
Banned
Hahaha, Scoville Jenkins is playing roger federer in the 1st round. I know Scoville somewhat and he is one of the up and coming US star player who has been a little bit of disappointmet so far. He had been slow to develop, mostly playing in the challengers. But he had a GREAT win in the 1st round of qualies, pulling off a close match in 3rd set and going all the way to the main draw. I hope Scoville kicks fed's butt, i really HOPE.
The draws are made in public, not in some dark, smoke filled, back room. They are not fixed. If you look at how the top 16 seeds are distributed in the women's draw this is what you'll see:
Henin's side of the draw has the 1,3,5,8,10,12,14,15 seeds. Sharapova's side of the draw has the 2,4,6,7,9,11,13,16 seeds. That's about as even as it can be.
That the Williams' choose to be part-time players and thus have rankings and seedings lower than they potentially could otherwise is no reason for anyone to assume the draws are fixed or that the rules regarding how the rankings are done and how draws are made should be changed specifically for them.
Henin's side of the draw has the 1,3,5,8,10,12,14,15 seeds. Sharapova's side of the draw has the 2,4,6,7,9,11,13,16 seeds. That's about as even as it can be.
That the Williams' choose to be part-time players and thus have rankings and seedings lower than they potentially could otherwise is no reason for anyone to assume the draws are fixed or that the rules regarding how the rankings are done and how draws are made should be changed specifically for them.
There's always somebody unhappy... when Williams faces top players early people cry "rigged draws!" and when Williams gets an easy draw they say "rigged draw! she's low-ranked, she should've had a tougher one!"
Federer's played through all of them - he's had some horrendous draws in Grand Slams (which he also breezed through because he's way too damn good, and then people in retrospect said "oh, it was easy all along") and he's had some easy ones. Likewise for Djokovic, Nadal, and all the others. Last year, everyone said Nadal got a dream draw at Wimbledon - was that also favoritism? Djokovic will get his share of easy draws, and his share of tough ones (such as this one - this one is pretty brutal), and so will all the others. Actually, at the US Open, the most common accusation is favoritism to Andy Roddick, and he's been put in a pretty bad bind - to face Federer in the quarters, and that's only if he gets past Berdych in the round of 16. So yes, it's all random coincidence.
Federer's played through all of them - he's had some horrendous draws in Grand Slams (which he also breezed through because he's way too damn good, and then people in retrospect said "oh, it was easy all along") and he's had some easy ones. Likewise for Djokovic, Nadal, and all the others. Last year, everyone said Nadal got a dream draw at Wimbledon - was that also favoritism? Djokovic will get his share of easy draws, and his share of tough ones (such as this one - this one is pretty brutal), and so will all the others. Actually, at the US Open, the most common accusation is favoritism to Andy Roddick, and he's been put in a pretty bad bind - to face Federer in the quarters, and that's only if he gets past Berdych in the round of 16. So yes, it's all random coincidence.
I don't doubt that but then again as you said he was too good for the rest of the field for any real concerns regarding his claiming of the title. Just remember the betting odds. But look at the outright winner bets for US Open 2007. He is being given a 1/2 winning odds which is i think much lower than in prior Slams (except the French Open). So he is now in more danger than ever before. Perhaps something had to be done about this.
Last year he was not considered to even pose a remote threat. But what about this years Wimbledon? Are you familiar i suppose with Mcenroe's attack on the organizers for bungling the tournament schedule, explicitly naming Nadal as a most vicitmized player. And how this bungling affected his grueling, marathon match against Sonderling. Nadal was forced from then on to play each day until the final. Could this be because of his recognition as a ****** in grass to the boy in the white jacket - having surprisingly challenged him in the previous year's final, or just another random event in a unfolding series?
Djokovic is earmarked as the man to end Federer's dominance at the U.S. Open this year.
Mcenroe said: ""I think the guy who has the best chance (to defeat Federer) is Djokovic - who beat him in Canada in the final up there. "
So i suppose under the light of the above statements, Djokovic's extremely hard draw and Federer's easy one could be considered with a strong dose of blind faith, again as an unlikely coincidence.
Hmmm, too many coincidences this year...
If it wouldn't be Roddick in the quarter's against Federer, it would be Blake who is also an american coming from Cincinnati' s final, and who has the same approximately nil chances of beating the swiss as his fellow countryman. So there is no real difference there. Davidenko is number 4 so he can only face Federer in the semis.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
I think the trouble is that people come to this with the NCAA tournament in the back of their mind. A very sensible system where all teams are seeded and the draw follows a LOT of order. That works.
In tennis it would not because the rankings/seedings could be manipulated weeks before each slam. The random nature of seed placements is actually a good thing.
In tennis it would not because the rankings/seedings could be manipulated weeks before each slam. The random nature of seed placements is actually a good thing.
dukemunson
Rookie
Haha i like how you continue to not believe how the draws are made...good humor. Sorry to ruin your conspiracy theory though but it's random with several players making the draw (via lotto chips they themselves pick). The seeds are made and then randomly drawn (placed of course so the 3 seed couldnt play the 1 seed int he quarters of course). After the seeds are placed then everything is random, meaning you could technically have every single widlcard and qualifier playing each other...its all random...meaning some yes are easier then others...though over the course of a career it of course evens out...
BigServer1
Legend
Great. Another conspiracy theory spouting poster...I was thinking we needed a few more around here.
Why fixed? Why would anybody on earth WANT to see those two play in an early round, yet again? It's bad luck for Tim, good luck for Dima...
Roger is Boring
Rookie
us fixed the draw for federer
tennispro11
Hall of Fame
Yeah sure, go crawl back in your hole.
The pro tournament draws are made in public, you can attend the draws--I have. There are often big ceremonies surrounding the making of the draw with media in attendance. As I said earlier they are not made in some dark, smoke filled, back room with Tony Soprano types saying 'where should be put so-and-so'. The term 'the luck of the draw' was not coined for no reason...
xtremerunnerars
Hall of Fame
Moron...doesn't the ITF make the draw?
Nadal_Freak
Banned
I agree. You seem to understand the game.
Similar threads
