"It does not seem right that Wimbledon is the only tournament to have it's own seed criteria" - Rafael Nadal

You are usually a pretty fair poster, but you are illogical here, and so is Nadal. He has not gotten the #1 seed 9/12 times in years when he won RG. You ignore that because he was so good that it did not hurt him. But if he was a lesser player, it might have, if your assumptions and his are correct.

As I keep pointing out, Wimbledon rarely knocks anyone down to a seed below their ranking, and the couple times it has happened for winners it was only a single number. Nada, I think, was seeded #2 at W in 2010. Check me for that.

A high percentage of major winners were #1 or #2 in the world regardless of a difference in their seeding. Seed did not stop Joker from winning last year, and it did not stop Fed in 2017 at the AO. Lots of champions have been seeded lower because of ranking that reflected points at the moment and not their true level.

Illogical seeding can hurt either way. Joker was hurt at RG in 2013 because of Nadal's seeding. Think about it. They used his ranking rather than his record on clay, gave him a lower seed, and that's why he faced Novak before the final. If he had lost, you might agree with me about seeding according to surface more. Great clay players do get hurt at RG because they are seeded way below their ability on clay.

Look at all the times Nadal has been seeded below his clay record and still went through the field as if it were nothing.
Henman agrees with me. That's the important thing, no?