Whats with the seedings for Aus Open?

[PGS]

Why is it that in Mens seedings, No 1 Seed and No 3 Seed are in the same half of the draw, and in womens side No 1 seed and No 4 seed are in the same half of the draw - very inconsistent. I am asking as I would like to see in the mens No 1 and No 4 in the same half. There has got to be a benefit of seed no 1 and that should be to have seed 4 in your half of the draw. The women slam have got it right, why not the men?. Is there something I'm missing ? I'd like to see Federer play Hewitt again in a final matchup, as I believe at the top of their games, they are the 2 best - look at the last few slams. Roddick is only higher than Hewitt in rankings because of the Grand Slam draw in the last year, and played more Tournaments. He has never beaten Hewitt in a grand Slam.
I'd like to know why the seedings are inconsistent between mens and womens like this. Doesn't seem right to me. Can anyone clarify with the rules ?
Thanks
PGS

 

[dbcontrol]

PGS, I'm fairly sure that this is the way it works: No.1 and 2 seeds are placed top and bottom of the draw, three and four are placed randomly on opposite sides of the draw so that, in a perfect, completley hypothetical environment, they meet one of the top two seeds in the semi finals. Seeds five through eight are randomly placed in each quarter of the draw so that they meet one of the top four seeds in the quarter finals. Seeds nine through sixteen are placed randomly in each eighth of the draw so that they meet one of the top eight seeds in the round of 16. Seeds seventeen through thirty two are randomly placed in each sixteenth of the draw so that they meet one of the top sixteen seeds in the round of 32. I'll give you the worst case scenario of a number one seeded player in a 128 man draw:

First Round: unseeded player Second Round: unseeded player
Third Round: 17th seed player Round of Sixteen: 9th seed player
Quarter Final: 5th seeded player Semi Final: 3rd seeded player
Final: 2nd seeded player

This is my understanding PGS, hopefully makes things clearer for you

 

[Max G.]

Yep, that's right.

Now let's wait for all the conspiracy theorists to jump in, they always do...

 

[PGS]

Dbcontrol and MaxG - thanks

Thanks you both for clarify and confirming. Being an Aussie, I'm disappointed each time I see Hewitt on Federer's side of the draw. Love to see them in the final (if they are both good enough to get there). Anyways, good enough.
Cheers and Beers
PGS.

 

[rhubarb]

PGS, I'm fairly sure that this is the way it works: No.1 and 2 seeds are placed top and bottom of the draw, three and four are placed randomly on opposite sides of the draw so that, in a perfect, completley hypothetical environment, they meet one of the top two seeds in the semi finals. Seeds five through eight are randomly placed in each quarter of the draw so that they meet one of the top four seeds in the quarter finals. Seeds nine through sixteen are placed randomly in each eighth of the draw so that they meet one of the top eight seeds in the round of 16. Seeds seventeen through thirty two are randomly placed in each sixteenth of the draw so that they meet one of the top sixteen seeds in the round of 32. I'll give you the worst case scenario of a number one seeded player in a 128 man draw:

First Round: unseeded player Second Round: unseeded player
Third Round: 17th seed player Round of Sixteen: 9th seed player
Quarter Final: 5th seeded player Semi Final: 3rd seeded player
Final: 2nd seeded player

This is my understanding PGS, hopefully makes things clearer for you

It's slightly more complicated than that:
In the third round, seeds 17 to 24 play 9 to 16; seeds 25 to 32 play 1 to 8.
In the fourth round, seeds 9 to 12 play 5 to 8; seeds 13 to 16 play 1 to 4.

So the top seeded player could play 25 in the third, 13 in the fourth, etc.

At many Grand Slams the seeds still seem to be drawn in pairs, i.e. if 5 is drawn in the top quarter, then 6 is in the bottom, etc. It's not an ITF rule to do this, but I think Roland Garros and Wimbledon adhere to it. The AO doesn't seem to have done it this year though.

 

[hlkimfung]

From my understanding, at least it's the way it used to be. 1/2 Vs 15/16. 1/2 Vs 7/8.

I always saw Sampras (no.1) play the 15 or 16 at 16's but never playing a no. 9 in the 16's

the Aus Open, however, is a bit different, as I remember in 1992, Edberg (1) play Lendl (5) in the Qtr