If Roddick wins Cincy where would he be seeded at the Open?

[cuddles26]

With the semis(I have not checked on the result yet although it either going on or done, so this is not a spoiler either way)and final left to come Roddick might win Cincinnati, a Masters title on hard courts of course. With his status as an American and former Champion where will they seed him at the U.S Open if he is not ranked in the top 8 still even if he wins Cincy(I think he will be top 8 if he wins but not sure)?

 

[alienhamster]

Ummmmm . . . doesn't work that way, cuddles.

Unless you live in Chadwixxville or Barrytown, in which case Roddick has already been handed the US Open trophy.

 

[cuddles26]

Ummmmm . . . doesn't work that way, cuddles.

Unless you live in Chadwixxville or Barrytown, in which case Roddick has already been handed the US Open trophy.

Well you dont honestly think they will deny him a top 8 seeding, at the very least, to respect the ranking of a Radek Stepanek do you?

 

[alienhamster]

Well you dont honestly think they will deny him a top 8 seeding, at the very least, to respect the ranking of a Radek Stepanek do you?

I honestly believe they will give him the seeding that corresponds to his ranking at the end of this tournament. I don't think he'll have enough points to get back up to 8 or higher unless some people above him withdraw.

ETA: I just realized that you might not know that the only tournament that can fudge with the seedings is Wimbledon. The US Open follows the entry ranking system to a T (unless someone has a protected ranking from an injury or something).

 

[cuddles26]

Well if he is seeded outside the top 8 it will be interesting to see who he plays in the first round. Hewitt who was #11, just over Roddick's #12im he will probably be passed by Andy, especialy if he wins the tournament, since Hewitt was in the semis there last year and is barely above him now. Not sure on Bhagdatis at #10 who is about 100 points ahead now, Roddick probably has to win the event to have a shot at passing him. Ancic at #9 has already pulled out of the U.S Open. Stepanek is at #8 and was 180 points ahead to be exact. Shame on the U.S Open committee if somehow Stepanek is the #8 ranked, Roddick #9 ranked, Roddick wins Cincy(if he did), and they still seed Stepanek as the last top 8 seed over Roddick, regardless what policy is usually.

 

[cuddles26]

I dont even know how Stepanek is ranked that high good grief. I see him at #8 and it is almost a joke. Then again Ljubicic at #3 is almost as much of a joke as Stepanek at #3, but atleast I see the results he has had to get that ranking even if for his abilities it seems like a joke.

 

[alienhamster]

Well, this gets into another debate about whether or not seeds should follow the year-ranking for individual tournaments.

IMO, every major (excepting maybe the Aussie Open) should follow a pattern similar to Wimbledon--that is, base the seed off of overall ranking PLUS performance on the specific surface results.

The end result is you get more accurate seedings alongside some potential controversy about seeding decisions (to keep our conversations about seeding interesting).

 

[cuddles26]

Well, this gets into another debate about whether or not seeds should follow the year-ranking for individual tournaments.

IMO, every major (excepting maybe the Aussie Open) should follow a pattern similar to Wimbledon--that is, base the seed off of overall ranking PLUS performance on the specific surface results.

The end result is you get more accurate seedings alongside some potential controversy about seeding decisions (to keep our conversations about seeding interesting).

I agree with you that they should follow the Wimbledon format.

Still I dont personaly see flipping Roddick and Stepanek potentialy for the #8 seed as anything that should cause a major debate.

 

[alienhamster]

I agree with you that they should follow the Wimbledon format.

Still I dont personaly see flipping Roddick and Stepanek potentialy for the #8 seed as anything that should cause a major debate.

Talk to Chadwixx and Barry about that one.

On second thought, don't. We all already know what they're going to say.

Anyhow, if they do reschedule the season to have smaller tourneys more consistently lead into the majors, perhaps people can make a bigger push for this kind of seeding change. A number of people would be for it, I think.

 

[TacoBellBorderBowl1946]

top 8 seeding for sure. top 4 is a little bit too generous, if he wins cincy and doesn't get a top 8 then its a little harsh.

 

[curryz_galore]

yeh that taco bell person is right

 

[cuddles26]

top 8 seeding for sure. top 4 is a little bit too generous, if he wins cincy and doesn't get a top 8 then its a little harsh.

Well if even you say top 4 is too high then I will concede it is too high. I cant imagine a bigger Roddick fan then yourself, fair to say? :mrgreen:

 

[rhubarb]

If Roddick wins today, he'll be ranked and seeded 10th. If Ferrero wins, Andy will stay 13th, but get seeded 12th since Ancic is not playing the USO. Unless of course there are any other withdrawls above that.

 

[alienhamster]

If Roddick wins today, he'll be ranked and seeded 10th. If Ferrero wins, Andy will stay 13th, but get seeded 12th since Ancic is not playing the USO. Unless of course there are any other withdrawls above that.

Are you sure about that? I thought he was #10 after the semifinals. Are other people losing points?

 

[Jedi Knight]

Regardless of what he's seeded, Andy should be motivated and should be making a huge push at the Open this year. After last year's disaster, he really needs a strong showing (at least making the semis) to prove to himself that he's still got it.

 

[nn]

if he wins he will close to 6 or 7 as he gets 500 ATP points for winning master

 

[LeftyServe]

if he wins he will close to 6 or 7 as he gets 500 ATP points for winning master

But you're forgetting that 350 points will drop off because he reached the Cinci final last year. Thus, 500 - 350 = 150 points net gain. If he loses, he'll have no net gain or loss.

 

[Shabazza]

But you're forgetting that 350 points will drop off because he reached the Cinci final last year. Thus, 500 - 350 = 150 points net gain. If he loses, he'll have no net gain or loss.

Indeed!
If he would win Cincy he'd have 1890 points - 25 behind Stepanek and 27 behind Baghdatis, who will be the 8th seed probably.
Regardless of what you guys wish or believe his seed should be, he won't be able to get a top 8 ranking and hence no top 8 seed.
USO never did seed a player outside a top 8 ranking as a top 8 seed (as long as there were no withdraws), regardless if it was an american or not.
This discussion is useless.

 

[jhhachamp]

*post deleted

 

[hlkimfung]

wasn't the seeding determined two weeks before the US Open, thus the result in Cincy and New Haven event don't counted towards the seedings

I remember in 1992, Lendl was no. 9 going into the Long Island event, reaching the final and move up to no.7, but he's still seeded no. 9 at the US open.

Regarding to the seeding-ranking policy, does that happen in the mid 90's that Y-man choose to opt out the US open when he's seeded no. 7 but actually ranked no. 4? The commitee seeded Chang no. 2 after his good showing for the summer, but Chang only ranked 4 or 5

 

[Richie Rich]

well, it would be hard for roddick to lose first round at us open this year so his ranking will only go up after the open as he will have more points added than what will be dropped. he'll probably be top 10 by year end. Stepanek has a lot of fall indoor tournament points to defend this year.

 

[cuddles26]

Regardless of what he's seeded, Andy should be motivated and should be making a huge push at the Open this year. After last year's disaster, he really needs a strong showing (at least making the semis) to prove to himself that he's still got it.

I agree, however if he is seeded outside the top 8 he could play Federer or Nadal as early as the round of 16, there would be a 25% chance, and a 50% he could play one of them in the quarters. That is the problem for him.

 

[NamRanger]

I agree, however if he is seeded outside the top 8 he could play Federer or Nadal as early as the round of 16, there would be a 25% chance, and a 50% he could play one of them in the quarters. That is the problem for him.

He would have no problem against Nadal on U.S. Open courts, but yes, against Federer, that would be a bad thing for him.

 

[KBalla08]

he'll be the #8 seed because ancic is probably not playing the USO, which bumps andy from #9 to #8 seed.

 

[Fee]

wasn't the seeding determined two weeks before the US Open, thus the result in Cincy and New Haven event don't counted towards the seedings

No, the seedings for tournament draws are based on the rankings in effect the day the draw is made. Wherever Andy is ranked on Monday will be his seed for the USO draw unless someone above him pulls out. The USO does not use a seeding formula.

Shabazza is right, this poll is useless (the discussion partly so).

 

[Shabazza]

he'll be the #8 seed because ancic is probably not playing the USO, which bumps andy from #9 to #8 seed.

No Ancic is already out of the top 10 and behind Roddick. His withdraw has no effect on his ranking and seeding - Roddick is #10 and will be seeded as 10

 

[Moose Malloy]

Regarding to the seeding-ranking policy, does that happen in the mid 90's that Y-man choose to opt out the US open when he's seeded no. 7 but actually ranked no. 4? The commitee seeded Chang no. 2 after his good showing for the summer, but Chang only ranked 4 or 5

Yeah, 1996 was the only year that the US Open didn't adhere to the rankings & Muster & Kafelnikov were very upset. Agassi was out of the top 8 & was moved to 6, & Chang was moved from 3 to 2.

No, the seedings for tournament draws are based on the rankings in effect the day the draw is made. Wherever Andy is ranked on Monday will be his seed for the USO draw unless someone above him pulls out. The USO does not use a seeding formula.

Shabazza is right, this poll is useless (the discussion partly so).

Do you know what the top 16 is post Cincinnati? Looks like Roddick could play Federer, Nadal, or Blake in the 4th round of the US Open.

 

[cuddles26]

Do you know what the top 16 is? Looks like Roddick could play Federer, Nadal, or Blake in the 4th round.

Even though Blake has won his last two matches with Roddick, and the last one was an outstanding match, Roddick would much rather play Blake then Federer or Nadal if he had the choice probably.

The rankings from 7-13 before Cincy though were:

7. Robredo 2010
8. Stepanek 1920
9. Ancic 1910(out of U.S Open anyway)
10. Bhagdatis 1852
11. Hewitt 1740
12. Roddick 1740
13. Gonzalez 1700

 

[rhubarb]

Do you know what the top 16 is post Cincinnati? Looks like Roddick could play Federer, Nadal, or Blake in the 4th round of the US Open.

1 Federer, Roger
2 Nadal, Rafael
3 Ljubicic, Ivan
4 Nalbandian, David
5 Blake, James
6 Robredo, Tommy
7 Davydenko, Nikolay
8 Baghdatis, Marcos
9 Stepanek, Radek
10 Roddick, Andy
11 Gonzalez, Fernando
12 Ancic, Mario
13 Ferrer, David
14 Berdych, Tomas
15 Nieminen, Jarkko
16 Haas, Tommy
17 Hewitt, Lleyton
18 Ferrero, Juan Carlos

Seeds 1-4 play 13-16 in the fourth round, and 5-8 play 9-12.

 

[Moose Malloy]

thanks! you must be good at math

Seeds 1-4 play 13-16 in the fourth round, and 5-8 play 9-12.

are you sure? I've seen slams where any combination of 1-8 played 9-16.

 

[rhubarb]

thanks! you must be good at math

are you sure? I've seen slams where any combination of 1-8 played 9-16.

There are quite a few people who do the hard work with calcs, I just update my spreadsheets

They've had the 1-4 v 13-16 etc rules for a few years now. It was even more rigid before they brought in 32 seeds.

 

[alienhamster]

There are quite a few people who do the hard work with calcs, I just update my spreadsheets

They've had the 1-4 v 13-16 etc rules for a few years now. It was even more rigid before they brought in 32 seeds.

Wait, seriously? I thought all the majors did random placement of the powers of 2 after the 1 and second seeds were placed. Is the US Open the only one that does 1-2 vs. 7-8 etc. now?

If so, it doesn't matter so much what Roddick's seed is now since he will draw the 1 or 2 seed (Nadal or Federer) by the quarters for sure if he's seeded anywhere between 7-10 (if my math is right here). I bet he's hoping to be on Nadal's side of the draw.

Edit: Wait, I guess it depends on how they group the 16. Is the idea that 9-12 plays 5-8 randomly?

 

[rhubarb]

Edit: Wait, I guess it depends on how they group the 16. Is the idea that 9-12 plays 5-8 randomly?

Yes, that's random.

 

[Hops]

There are quite a few people who do the hard work with calcs, I just update my spreadsheets

They've had the 1-4 v 13-16 etc rules for a few years now. It was even more rigid before they brought in 32 seeds.

add to this

1-8 v 25-32 and 9-16 v 17-24 in R32.

So Fed could draw Gasquet in R32, but not Murray.

 

[rhubarb]

Looks like Roddick will be seeded 9th since Stepanek has withdrawn.