2 former Wimbledon Champions

B

barry

Hall of Fame
in the Semifinals of Wimbledon.

Head to Head

Federer / Hewitt record 9 to 7
Federer / Roddick Record 8 to 1
Hewitt / Roddick record 8 to 3

Two former champs in the top half. First time ever number 1 plays number 2 in the world in a semifinal matchup at a grand slam.

2 one slam wonders in the bottom half.

Hewitt has had a pretty good year.
Finals of U.S. Open, beats Roddick
Finals of world championship
Finals of the Australian Open
Finals of Pacific Life Open beats Roddick again

wimbledon seeding committe is a joke. Seed by rank and get rid of back room committee's
 
barry said:
Two former champs in the top half. First time ever number 1 plays number 2 in the world in a semifinal matchup at a grand slam.
Click to expand...

Have you checked that? I'd be surprised if it didn't happen in the 70s-90s, but don't have time to go through the draws right now. In those days seeding was arbitrary and didn't depend on ranking like it does today.
 
You never give up do you barry. All your posts are saying basically the same thing each time. Noone ever listened to you, what makes you think they'll listen to you this time?
 
Woulda, coulda, barry.

Roddick has beaten both Hewitt and Federer.

If Hewitt had been seeded #2, he woulda, coulda gotten spanked by Karlovic. Ivo owns Hewitt on grass, dude.

Ownage = never beaten him... ever! As in, Hewitt has never beaten Karlovic.
 
roddick beat federer ONCE....and federer choked in a tight match..how many times has federer beaten roddick? ok...shut up now. As for hewitt/roddick, how many times has hewitt beaten roddick lately..? ok...shut up babblelot. you babble way too much. thanks
 
.

No one wants to see Fed kill Hewitt in the final anyway, it was a very wise move to give Roddick the number 2, setting up a nice final, as opposed to a boring final where Hewitt gets slapped around.
 
Babblelot said:
Woulda, coulda, barry.

Roddick has beaten both Hewitt and Federer.

If Hewitt had been seeded #2, he woulda, coulda gotten spanked by Karlovic. Ivo owns Hewitt on grass, dude.

Ownage = never beaten him... ever! As in, Hewitt has never beaten Karlovic.
Click to expand...


Ranked 61 in the world and never won a title, sure Hewitt was not sweating him. Of course he must be pretty good he was in the Hewitt side of the draw.

Roddick side is clay court specialist, qualifiers, and unknowns.

By the way Hewitt has beaten Roddick the last 3 times they played.
 
No, Karlovic was in the bottom half of the draw and was likely to play the second seed in the second round. That's the whole point.

Hewitt is 0-2 against Karlovic, both on grass.
 
barry you forgot to log in as chadwitless to support your mind numbing conspiricy theories for the nth time.
 
rhubarb said:
No, Karlovic was in the bottom half of the draw and was likely to play the second seed in the second round. That's the whole point.

Hewitt is 0-2 against Karlovic, both on grass.
Click to expand...
Just to drive the point home for barry's benefit, Ivo crushed Hewitt in 1R of W. when Lleyton was attempting to defend!

Ivo spanked Hewitt again on grass circa three weeks ago!

:p :p :p
 
tetsuo10 u can link ppl to articles and facts all u want, but they are roddick fans, they wont understand. they will deny everything u post. it took ppl 8 pages to understand that roddick got special treatment in a small tournament a few months ago. when the article clearly stated he did. the ppl arent very bright and its a waste of time to argue with them.
 
Simon Cowell said:
it was a very wise move to give Roddick the number 2, setting up a nice final
Click to expand...

well said, but this is professional tennis, ppl shouldnt be given things so the ratings go up.
 
Chadwixx said:
tetsuo10 u can link ppl to articles and facts all u want, but they are roddick fans, they wont understand. they will deny everything u post. it took ppl 8 pages to understand that roddick got special treatment in a small tournament a few months ago. when the article clearly stated he did. the ppl arent very bright and its a waste of time to argue with them.
Click to expand...
Chad, you missed the point of the article, which states that the last time the world 1 and 2 played in a grand slam semi was 1989. This fact completely contradicts the many posts claiming that it had never happened before.

But it was especially comic for you to then claim that others were "stupid" immeidately after having made this mistake. You seem unable to discern the CONTENT of a link, unable to distinguish a verifiable FACT from abother yahoo's OPINION. I especially liked a few days ago when you dismissed a fact from another board member because you said he was "just repeating what was already said" and not thinking "creatively" -- like you do when you make stuff up.

It IS convenient for you to claim, though, that anyone who disagrees with you is a "Roddick fan." (Many of us who argue against you are not, at least not any more so than Hewitt fans or Federer fans.) The more likely case is that anyone who disagrees with you is doing so because you've PUBLICLY and REPEATEDLY misread the rules, distorted logic, or twisted facts to support your consiracy theories.
 
Chadwixx said:
tetsuo10 u can link ppl to articles and facts all u want, but they are roddick fans, they wont understand. they will deny everything u post. it took ppl 8 pages to understand that roddick got special treatment in a small tournament a few months ago. when the article clearly stated he did. the ppl arent very bright and its a waste of time to argue with them.
Click to expand...

Chadwixx, the article tetsuo10 referred to supported *my* argument, i.e. that the top 2 players were likely to have played each other in a Wimbledon semi before, and it says this happened last in 1989.

For the record (again), I am patently not a Roddick fan, and don't believe I have a bias towards any particuar player when discussing the issues related to rankings, seedings and draws. You and barry, however, seem to have very strong biases and will throw in absolutely any argument (no matter how illogical) in order to support your rather tenuous position.
 
barry said:
Ranked 61 in the world and never won a title, sure Hewitt was not sweating him. Of course he must be pretty good he was in the Hewitt side of the draw.

Roddick side is clay court specialist, qualifiers, and unknowns.

By the way Hewitt has beaten Roddick the last 3 times they played.
Click to expand...
Just in case any of you are compelled to keep winessing this roadkill, I can sum up for you the entirety of the barry worldview encompassing a thousand posts, to which you are welcome to subscribe immediately:

Roddick bad. Hewitt good. You bad at tennis. Me good 5.0! Wimbledon committee very bad! Eagnas very good!

Walla!

(Now -- don't you all think we could have accomplished that in one thread and one post, instead of dozens?)
 
Um, for all these people saying Karlovic would destroy Hewitt, last time I checked Roddick didn't have to play Karlovic because he lost early. So that is a good argument considering the guy didn't even make it to Roddick, so you think because Hewitt would be there he would magically win and face Hewitt? Nice try though.
 
does anyone know what match was played in 1989 in a semi with the #1 and #2 player in the world?

becker vs lendl, guess what, it was at wimbledon. its not like a real tournament has ever done it.
 
Chadwixx said:
does anyone know what match was played in 1989 in a semi with the #1 and #2 player in the world?

becker vs lendl, guess what, it was at wimbledon. its not like a real tournament has ever done it.
Click to expand...
Reading lesson: the article notes that the phenomenon occurred LAST in 1989, not ONLY in 1989. You can tell the difference. But you like to distort facts to suit your case, don't you.
 
divito said:
Um, for all these people saying Karlovic would destroy Hewitt, last time I checked Roddick didn't have to play Karlovic because he lost early. So that is a good argument considering the guy didn't even make it to Roddick, so you think because Hewitt would be there he would magically win and face Hewitt? Nice try though.
Click to expand...

We are discussing how the draw was made, not how it played out. Hence, at the time was made, there was no reason to believe that Karlovic would lose to a lucky loser; indeed, everyone believed that he'd get to round 2 and play Roddick.

Unless you believe that the tournament comittee somehow looked into their crystal ball and saw the future, who eventually won and lost has no bearing on how the draw was made, and we're saying that Hewitt would not have wanted to switch places with Roddick.
 
Max G. said:
We are discussing how the draw was made, not how it played out. Hence, at the time was made, there was no reason to believe that Karlovic would lose to a lucky loser; indeed, everyone believed that he'd get to round 2 and play Roddick.

Unless you believe that the tournament comittee somehow looked into their crystal ball and saw the future, who eventually won and lost has no bearing on how the draw was made, and we're saying that Hewitt would not have wanted to switch places with Roddick.
Click to expand...

_39197838_hewitt_ap.jpg


:p :p
 
gully said:
Just in case any of you are compelled to keep winessing this roadkill, I can sum up for you the entirety of the barry worldview encompassing a thousand posts, to which you are welcome to subscribe immediately:

Roddick bad. Hewitt good. You bad at tennis. Me good 5.0! Wimbledon committee very bad! Eagnas very good!

Walla!

(Now -- don't you all think we could have accomplished that in one thread and one post, instead of dozens?)
Click to expand...

Gully believes all seeding should be done by committee, right? I can't believe you are so stupid that you can't grasp a simple concept. Everyone else has:

One more time for the lame:

The Wimbledon seeding committee should be eliminated and at entry ranking system should be used to establish seeds.

Can you follow? Do you believe otherwise, that is what is being discussed, not you hero Roddick whom has benefited from the committee.
 
Barry - I can't believe you think that you believe everyone thinks your are right on the seeding issue. I think the way WImbledon does it is great. Look at Grosjean. He is ranked 26 in world and they move him up to 9 seed. Then he lives up to the seeding because he can play on Grass. Wimbledon still only seeds the top 32 in world and then adjusts the order. If you are #40 you can't get seeded.

What difference does it make if Hewitt has to beat Roger in semi's or finals - they aren't playing for 3rd place, they're there to win it.

Quit beating the dead horse and enjoy the tournament.
 
spt

You are entitled to your opinion just like everyone else. I think many have protested the Wimbledon committee many times and it is time for a change, don't you think.

If every other tournament in the world seeds by entry ranking, why does Wimbledon seed by committee?

Simple concept, you say keep the committee, I say get rid of them and seed by rank. Let's make things consistent.
 
thanu said:
Hewitt to Roddick.... isn't 8 to 3. Hewitt has beaten Roddick 6 times and has only lost once.

-Thanu
Click to expand...

so roddick has 1 career win over fed, and 1 in his career vs hewitt? how can ppl really think he is in the same league as these guys?

spt, i like grojean, but its not like he beat anyone in the top 50. further proving how weak the bottom half really was. the difference between a semi final and a final are alot of ranking points and money. roddick got the #2 seed in a cakewalk draw, by making it to the final and having fed take down hewitt, the #4 roddick will move into the #2 spot. if they would have seeded properly it would have been a hewitt federer final, making roddick fall even further in the rankings.

its not rocket science, but to roddick fans it is :)
 
gully said:
Reading lesson: the article notes that the phenomenon occurred LAST in 1989, not ONLY in 1989. You can tell the difference. But you like to distort facts to suit your case, don't you.
Click to expand...

So what tournaments have done this, we are waiting?

By the way, the link given does not mention Becker or 1989. Guess my browser goes to imaginary links like yours.

Do you homework and quit showing your ignorance! For all I know you could be one of the Wimbledon seeding buffoon
 
does anyone remember the match of hewitt and roddick at the tennis masters cup 2004 where hewitt won like the last 22 points, that was brutal
 
barry said:
Gully believes all seeding should be done by committee, right?
Click to expand...
You know I've never said that, though I have frequently corrected your misstatements about seeding practices at OTHER tournaments as well as at this one. I HAVE said here that there are good arguments to be made for BOTH Hewitt and Roddick for the #2 slot, and I HAVE said there are good reasons for this ONE tournament to employ a formula weighting recent grass results applied to entry rank.
 
gully said:
You know I've never said that, though I have frequently corrected your misstatements about seeding practices at OTHER tournaments as well as at this one. I HAVE said here that there are good arguments to be made for BOTH Hewitt and Roddick for the #2 slot, and I HAVE said there are good reasons for this ONE tournament to employ a formula weighting recent grass results applied to entry rank.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are in favor of seeding by committee. You are entitled to your opinion. I believe we should use one metric for all seeding, which is by rank.

We just have a difference of opinion. I am against the new doubles format, the doubles players should have had a say in it.
http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=ap-atp-doubleschanges&prov=ap&type=lgns
 
barry said:
By the way, the link given does not mention Becker or 1989. Guess my browser goes to imaginary links like yours.

Do you homework and quit showing your ignorance! For all I know you could be one of the Wimbledon seeding buffoon
Click to expand...

The link noting the history (it wasn't mine) seems to have been moved: it's now at http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=reu-wimbledonmen_preview_picture&prov=reuters&type=lgns

And it says:

The 2002 Wimbledon champion is the third seed despite being ranked number two in the world.

It is the first time since 1989 that the top two in the world rankings have met in the Wimbledon semi-finals.

I will add that the FACTS of the article CORRECT your earlier statements that world 1 and 2 had NEVER met in a grand slam semi before. Again, that was something YOU made up here, in your infamous "It's a pitty" thread [sic]:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=460295&postcount=15

And it was, usual, wrong.

It's not up to me to do the research to continue correcting your multiple -- yet always comically infantile -- posts on the topic.
 
barry said:
Sounds like you are in favor of seeding by committee. You are entitled to your opinion. I believe we should use one metric for all seeding, which is by rank.

We just have a difference of opinion. I am alsoagainst the new doubles format, the doubles players should have had a say in it.
http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=ap-atp-doubleschanges&prov=ap&type=lgns
Click to expand...
No, I have said that the formula used by Wimbledon is one that uses entry ranks, weights them with grass results, and is appropriate given the short season. I do not favor people just making it up as they go along.

You are absolutely correct about the doubles, though.
 
rhubarb said:
Have you checked that? I'd be surprised if it didn't happen in the 70s-90s, but don't have time to go through the draws right now. In those days seeding was arbitrary and didn't depend on ranking like it does today.
Click to expand...

Here is the fact checker. You are the one claiming all the knowledge and supporting seeding by committee, not me.
 
Kurosaki said:
does anyone remember the match of hewitt and roddick at the tennis masters cup 2004 where hewitt won like the last 22 points, that was brutal
Click to expand...
Brutal indeed. Hewitt is completely in Roddick's kitchen, and if by some miracle we end up with a Roddick-Hewitt final, it'll be interesting to see if Roddick can keep his head and heart in the match when things don't go his way. It'd be interesting too to see just how in-your-face Hewitt'd get with the lawnmower moves, etc. -- something he doesn't dare pull against Fed.
 
Kurosaki said:
does anyone remember the match of hewitt and roddick at the tennis masters cup 2004 where hewitt won like the last 22 points, that was brutal
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing that up. The BBC were showing a documentary on the Masters cup during todays rain delay and A.Rod looked like he was almost going to end up into tears after that heavy defeat. The atmosphere at Houstan was amazing especially those night matches played under the lights. Hewitt was just soo pumped up when he pummeled Roddick, I remember him hitting an insane passing winner down the line and exchanging high-fives with the crowd. You could really get a feel for the intensity of Hewitts play that night by the screeching noise produced by Hewitts constant scampering on the hard court surface.
 
What difference does it make if Hewitt has to beat Roger in semi's or finals - they aren't playing for 3rd place, they're there to win it.
Click to expand...

That should read:

"What difference does it make if Hewitt gets beaten by Roger in the semis or the finals..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Poll Poll
Roddick - Hewitt Quarterfinal - who do you think will win?
Replies
32
Views
2K
obsessedtennisfandisorder
obsessedtennisfandisorder
MichaelChang
Roger Federer By The Numbers
Replies
6
Views
956
kOaMaster
kOaMaster
weakera
Djokovic vs. Federer: A decade at Wimbledon
Replies
47
Views
3K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
Bukmeikara
  • Poll Poll
Best tennis season 2000-2010
Replies
14
Views
1K
Strobe Lights
S
BGod
  • Poll Poll
Hewitt vs. Roddick (Careers)
Replies
21
Views
2K
Deleted member 307496
D
Back
Top