The rankings should change for each surface.


Hall of Fame

I disagree with the assessment that the USO, particularly on the men's side, produces anomolous winners. In fact I would rank the AO or Wimbledon just behind the French who is the champion of the anomolous winner. I think Korda and Johansson trump any one timers at the USO especially when those Open one timers are named Safin, Hewitt and Roddick who backed up their wins with at the very least another major final in short order. In fact each reached number one the year they won the Open so ther're hardly anomolous in the context of the year they were played. The same can't be said for Petr or Thomas, or even for Safin in '05.

If you include Sampras's win in '02 you only need to look back to Becker's AO win in '96 for an apples to apples comparison, but not really in that Sampras won in '02 after reaching the USO final in '00 and '01.

The US Open probably more due to its place in the calendar than anything else generally ends up being the most affirming major as to who the #1 is at year end and historically produces the least anomolous winners of any major when viewed over time.


Hall of Fame
when did that happen?

TENNIS; Dispute Over Seeding May Provoke Wimbledon Boycott

Published: April 24, 2001
Gustavo Kuerten, the top-ranked player at the end of last year, is among the players prepared to boycott Wimbledon this summer if the All England Club does not seed them according to their ATP rankings.

''If the guys come to me, and say, 'We're not playing, we're not happy about this,' I'm going to be one who is going to vote in favor of that,'' Kuerten said after winning the Monte Carlo Open here on Sunday.

Last year, the Spaniards Alex Corretja and Albert Costa withdrew from Wimbledon shortly before it began because they were upset about not being seeded despite their high ranking.

The All England Club, which plays host to and operates Wimbledon, has yet to announce its plans for seedings this year. Its new chairman, Tim Phillips, was in Monte Carlo last week to meet with several players, including Corretja. The club has scheduled a news conference for Tuesday to announce this year's prize money, and it is not clear if the seeding issue would also be addressed.

''My understanding is that they are not going to announce anything definitive on Tuesday,'' said Larry Scott, the ATP Tour's chief operating officer. He said he thought the problem had yet to be resolved. ''But over all, I think the debate between the players and the club has been positive. They are coming at it from different points of view. But there is a real desire to bridge the gap.''

It remains difficult to imagine that Wimbledon will close the gap entirely. Grass remains too rare and particular a surface and the club is too proud of its traditions for it to adhere slavishly to the entry system, the process that takes into account the results of the last 52 weeks. It is used by the other major tournaments in the world.

The most likely scenario is the implementation of a mathematical formula that would still take into account grass-court ability and results but would eliminate the subjectivity of the seeding process.

Mathematical seeding formulas could be used for all surfaces. The ATP studied that possibility in recent years, but according to Scott, it is not going to happen soon because the players do not like it and because of the diminishing gap in speed between outdoor hardcourt and clay-court events.

Another issue for the ATP is the glut of clay-court tournaments in the spring. Cramming three Masters Series events and the French Open into an eight-week period takes a physical and mental toll on the players. That helps explain why a significant number of them, including Andre Agassi, now the Tour's dominant player, chose not to play the Monte Carlo event, despite the fact that the world's top players are required to play in all the Masters Series stops.

''I didn't hear the ATP create much stir over these absences; it was surprisingly mute about them,'' said Patrice Dominguez, the co-director of the Monte Carlo event. Topics/People/C/Costa, Albert

*Keep in mind that in 2000 Wimbledon seeded 16. In fact the '01 AO and RG only seeded 16. Wimbledon '01 was the first time any major seeded 32 and the other 3 majors followed suit after that.
Last edited:


Hall of Fame
2000 Wimbledon Seeds:


2 AGASSI Andre

3 NORMAN Magnus

4 KUERTEN Gustavo


6 PIOLINE Cedric

7 HEWITT Lleyton


9 ENQVIST Thomas


11 KRAJICEK Richard

12 RAFTER Patrick

13 KIEFER Nicolas


15 SAFIN Marat

16 LAPENTTI Nicolas

The Rankings as of Jun 12, 2000:

1 Agassi, Andre (USA)

2 Norman, Magnus (SWE)

3 Kuerten, Gustavo (BRA)

4 Sampras, Pete (USA)

5 Kafelnikov, Yevgeny (RUS)

6 Pioline, Cedric (FRA)

7 Enqvist, Thomas (SWE)

8 Safin, Marat (RUS)

9 Lapentti, Nicolas (ECU)

10 Corretja, Alex (ESP)

11 Hewitt, Lleyton (AUS)

12 Ferrero, Juan Carlos (ESP)

13 Kiefer, Nicolas (GER)

14 Henman, Tim (GBR)

15 Costa, Albert (ESP)

16 El Aynaoui, Younes (MAR)

17 Philippoussis, Mark (AUS)

18 Squillari, Franco (ARG)

19 Haas, Tommy (GER)

20 Rusedski, Greg (GBR)

21 Escude, Nicolas (FRA)

22 Martin, Todd (USA)

23 Rafter, Patrick (AUS)

In 2000 Corretja and Costa staged their own little "boycott" declining to play Wimbledon.

In 2001 came the threatened organized boycott,

a revised seeding "formula" and 32 seeds for the first time at ANY major.

Then came the change in playing conditions, which favored who?

Those who say that Wimbledon staunchly holds to its traditions need to know the responses made at the AELTCC and the timing of those responses.

Yeah the "predominantly white togs" rule is still there but there were far more substantive changes made in the format and conditions which make that claim rather amusing.
Last edited: