Wimbledon 2011 Seedings

[AlexDK09]

1 Rafael NADAL (ESP) [1]
2 Novak DJOKOVIC (SRB) [2]
3 Roger FEDERER (SUI) [3]
4 Andy MURRAY (GBR) [4]
5 Robin SODERLING (SWE) [5]
6 Tomas BERDYCH (CZE) [6]
7 David FERRER (ESP) [7]
8 Andy RODDICK (USA) [8]
9 Gael MONFILS (FRA) [9]
10 Mardy FISH (USA) [10]
11 Jurgen MELZER (AUT) [11]
12 Jo-Wilfried TSONGA (FRA) [12]
13 Viktor TROICKI (SRB) [13]
14 Stanislas WAWRINKA (SUI) [14]
15 Gilles SIMON (FRA) [15]
16 Nicolas ALMAGRO (ESP) [16]
17 Richard GASQUET (FRA) [17]
18 Mikhail YOUZHNY (RUS) [18]
19 Michael LLODRA (FRA) [19]
20 Florian MAYER (GER) [20]
21 Fernando VERDASCO (ESP) [21]
22 Alexandr DOLGOPOLOV (UKR) [22]
23 Janko TIPSAREVIC (SRB) [23]
24 Juan Martin DEL POTRO (ARG) [24]
25 Juan Ignacio CHELA (ARG) [25]
26 Guillermo GARCIA-LOPEZ (ESP) [26]
27 Marin CILIC (CRO) [27]
28 David NALBANDIAN (ARG) [28]
29 Nikolay DAVYDENKO (RUS) [29]
30 Thomaz BELLUCCI (BRA) [30]
31 Milos RAONIC (CAN) [31]
32 Marcos BAGHDATIS (CYP) [32]

 

[Bud]

^^ When's the last time Federer wasn't seeded 1 or 2... 2003?

 

[HurricaneDominic]

1 Caroline WOZNIACKI (DEN) [1]
2 Kim CLIJSTERS (BEL) [2]
3 Vera ZVONAREVA (RUS) [3]
4 Na LI (CHN) [4]
5 Victoria AZARENKA (BLR) [5]
6 Maria SHARAPOVA (RUS) [6]
7 Francesca SCHIAVONE (ITA) [7]
8 Serena WILLIAMS (USA) [8]
9 Petra KVITOVA (CZE) [9]
10 Marion BARTOLI (FRA) [10]
11 Samantha STOSUR (AUS) [11]
12 Andrea PETKOVIC (GER) [12]
13 Svetlana KUZNETSOVA (RUS) [13]
14 Agnieszka RADWANSKA (POL) [14]
15 Anastasia PAVLYUCHENKOVA (RUS) [15]
16 Jelena JANKOVIC (SRB) [16]
17 Julia GOERGES (GER) [17]
18 Kaia KANEPI (EST) [18]
19 Ana IVANOVIC (SRB) [19]
20 Yanina WICKMAYER (BEL) [20]
21 Shuai PENG (CHN) [21]
22 Flavia PENNETTA (ITA) [22]
23 Shahar PEER (ISR) [23]
24 Venus WILLIAMS (USA) [24]
25 Dominika CIBULKOVA (SVK) [25]
26 Daniela HANTUCHOVA (SVK) [26]
27 Maria KIRILENKO (RUS) [27]
28 Jarmila GAJDOSOVA (AUS) [28]
29 Ekaterina MAKAROVA (RUS) [29]
30 Roberta VINCI (ITA) [30]
31 Bethanie MATTEK-SANDS (USA) [31]
32 Lucie SAFAROVA (CZE) [32]

Serena seeded #8 but Venus #24 . . Good luck to whichever Top 16 player draws Venus in R3.

 

[gpt]

Has it been regular practice in recent years for the Wimbledon seedings to go mirror with ATP rankings?

Never used to be strictly so

 

[slice bh compliment]

They bumped Roddick up a little. Tsonga, too.

 

[robin7]

^^ When's the last time Federer wasn't seeded 1 or 2... 2003?

Yes. Roger was seeded 5th in 2003, 1st from 2004 to 2008, 2nd from 2009 to 2010.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=pa&y=0&m=s&e=540

 

[robin7]

4 Na LI (CHN) [4]
8 Serena WILLIAMS (USA) [8]
24 Venus WILLIAMS (USA) [24]

Serena seeded #8 but Venus #24 . . Good luck to whichever Top 16 player draws Venus in R3.

Playing the Williams sisters at the same tournament is always nightmares to all players. Let's see if Li Na can avoid that.

 

[Raistlin]

If I remember Wimbledon has their own mathematical way of determining their seeds based on current seedings and past results there, had the margin of points between Djokovic and Federer be less of a gap, Federer may have taken #2 seed.

 

[sdont]

Richie is screwed by the fact that he didn't play last year. No way he should be seeded lower than Almagro, whose best result is 3rd round.

 

[Soianka]

Seeding the Williams sisters so low when they have won 9 of the last 11 Wimbledons is an insult.

 

[HurricaneDominic]

Seeding the Williams sisters so low when they have won 9 of the last 11 Wimbledons is an insult.

In my opinion Venus's form is looking better than Serena's right now, but I think they should have been seeded 5 and 6 or something like that.

 

[Soianka]

In my opinion Venus's form is looking better than Serena's right now, but I think they should have been seeded 5 and 6 or something like that.

Yes, definitely in the top 8 of seeds with their amazing Wimbledon records. No one else in the draw comes even close.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

Richie is screwed by the fact that he didn't play last year. No way he should be seeded lower than Almagro, whose best result is 3rd round.

damned... just outside of the top 16 ! :?

 

[LetsGoRoddick]

Roddick as the 8th seed. What an epic sigh of relief I had when I saw that. Improves his chances of having a good run and improving the ranking as we progress into the later part of the season.

 

[Bartelby]

Federer at number 2 would have been better.

 

[onyxrose81]

Roddick as the 8th seed. What an epic sigh of relief I had when I saw that. Improves his chances of having a good run and improving the ranking as we progress into the later part of the season.

I hope he can at least make the quarters. The Murray loss makes me nervous a bit; not because he lost it, but how he lost it. He'll need to make the quarters to have any hope for next year, because the formula takes in account the previous two years. He's lucky this year because he made the final in 09 but if he bombs out before quarters, he'll have to add a fourth round exit in 2010 to this year's result. Not good.

 

[batz]

Has it been regular practice in recent years for the Wimbledon seedings to go mirror with ATP rankings?

Never used to be strictly so

It isn't a mirror of current rankings.

 

[Ralph]

Federer at number 2 would have been better.

I'll disagree there, as at least there's a very slim (cough, ahem, conspiracy theories...) chance that he'll get to meet Ralph in the semis rather than in the final. Assuming of course that bother/either get there.

I think he stands a better chance of beating him and subsequently facing no demons in the final, should they meet there.

 

[Tammo]

I think Tsonga should be higher.

 

[batz]

I'll disagree there, as at least there's a very slim (cough, ahem, conspiracy theories...) chance that he'll get to meet Ralph in the semis rather than in the final. Assuming of course that bother/either get there.

I think he stands a better chance of beating him and subsequently facing no demons in the final, should they meet there.

Can I ask why, if they were going to frig the draw, you think the AELTC would frig it to Murray's detriment?

 

[rhubarb]

Yes. Roger was seeded 5th in 2003, 1st from 2004 to 2008, 2nd from 2009 to 2010.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=pa&y=0&m=s&e=540

That shows the rankings, not the seedings.

In 2003, he may have been ranked 5th, but he was actually seeded 4th. Carlos Moya above him didn't play.
And last year, he was top seed as he had a lot more grass points than Rafa did.

 

[rhubarb]

I think Tsonga should be higher.

He needed to have won Queen's I think.

 

[ruerooo]

^^ When's the last time Federer wasn't seeded 1 or 2... 2003?

But ... does this mean Roger and Rafa are going to have to play each other in the semis ...?

 

[ruerooo]

Has it been regular practice in recent years for the Wimbledon seedings to go mirror with ATP rankings?

Never used to be strictly so

The Wimbledon seedings are based on grass points for the last two years.

(Which is why I'm wondering why Roger is seeded third and not second, since he won in 2009, but that's beside the current point.)

If you look closely, you'll see that the seedings don't in fact mirror the ATP rankings.

 

[CDNguy87]

There seems to be a lot of misinformation in this thread about the seedings. This site probably has the best explanation of the formula used: http://www.oncourtadvantage.com/grand-slams-wimbledon-2/wimbledon-2011-mens-singles-draw-seeding/

 

[Ralph]

Can I ask why, if they were going to frig the draw, you think the AELTC would frig it to Murray's detriment?

Hi Batz! I followed your post the other day when someone else was asking/commenting about this, I think it was Speranza. What you said then made sense in that thread, though I can't find it now!

I remember you saying that frigging the draw isn't likely or beneficial to the organizations involved, and that Federer was going to be more than likely seeded 3 due to his recent playing. Now that the seeds are out, my tongue in cheek hint at conspiracy theories is based on the likelihood of Roger and Ralph ending up in the same half. In theory, it should be a 50% chance of this happening. In reality, I doubt he'll end up in Ralph's half. I'm as cynical as Speranza! Can you imagine the hype for a rematch in the final? Sunday viewing figures will be greater than a Friday semi.

The reason I don't think Murray is a reason to frig the draw is because there's no way he'll avoid all the top 3.

There, you asked why

 

[batz]

Hi Batz! I followed your post the other day when someone else was asking/commenting about this, I think it was Speranza. What you said then made sense in that thread, though I can't find it now!

I remember you saying that frigging the draw isn't likely or beneficial to the organizations involved, and that Federer was going to be more than likely seeded 3 due to his recent playing. Now that the seeds are out, my tongue in cheek hint at conspiracy theories is based on the likelihood of Roger and Ralph ending up in the same half. In theory, it should be a 50% chance of this happening. In reality, I doubt he'll end up in Ralph's half. I'm as cynical as Speranza! Can you imagine the hype for a rematch in the final? Sunday viewing figures will be greater than a Friday semi.

The reason I don't think Murray is a reason to frig the draw is because there's no way he'll avoid all the top 3.

There, you asked why

That's true - but there is most definitely a preferred option for the semis if you're inclined to give Murray a helping hand. That preferred option would be the one guy in the top 3 who currently has a worse grasscourt record than Murray and hasn't won lots of Wimbledon titles.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

2 Novak DJOKOVIC (SRB) [2]
3 Roger FEDERER (SUI) [3]

No cojones, the Wimbledon committee, as I've expected.

To prefer to a 6-time champion on your courts a challenger with no titles on grass is disgraceful.

 

[Beryl]

Yes, Delpo is #24. Much better than #25-#32 because he avoids the 1-8 seeds in the 3rd round and will face a 9-16 seed instead. Well, if he makes it that far. Nothing is easy with Delpo on grass.

 

[CDNguy87]

2 Novak DJOKOVIC (SRB) [2]
3 Roger FEDERER (SUI) [3]

No cojones, the Wimbledon committee, as I've expected.

To prefer to a 6-time champion on your courts a challenger with no titles on grass is disgraceful.

Click the link I posted above. The Wimbledon committee doesn't have specific discretion to seed one player in a certain place over another (at least for the men). The only subjective powers the Wimbledon committee had were to choose the seeding formula (well beforehand) that would be applied. In this case, Djokovic's big advantage over Fed in the ATP Rankings easily overcame the bonus points Federer would have gotten from his 2009 Wimbledon win.

 

[jaggy]

i had hoped James Ward may have slipped in, ah well

 

[HurricaneDominic]

i had hoped James Ward may have slipped in, ah well

Why on Earth would James Ward, who's never been in the Top 100 suddenly jump over 100 'ranking' spots to inside the Top 32.
He ALWAYS peaks at Queens/Eastbourne every year, this year more than others. I truly hope this spurs him on to become Top 100, but he's 24, and if his results follow suit as they usually do, then we won't see him again until this time next year. Hopefully he starts playing Qualies for bigger tournaments and winning through, he needs main tour matches regularly.

 

[Love Game]

Seeding the Williams sisters so low when they have won 9 of the last 11 Wimbledons is an insult.

I don't get that. what's an "insult" about treating all players equally?

In my opinion Venus's form is looking better than Serena's right now, but I think they should have been seeded 5 and 6 or something like that.

They haven't played for ... how long? ... before they actually showed up in Eastbourne, nobody knew for sure whether they'd even be playing.

I understand that the WS have good excuses for remaining inactive for so long, but to me they come across as elitist, unwilling to play the "lesser" tournaments, but even if that's an unfair criticism, it's fair to say they haven't shown their level of play in time to be seeded preferentially higher than their WTA rankings, IMO

 

[Love Game]

2 Novak DJOKOVIC (SRB) [2]
3 Roger FEDERER (SUI) [3]

No cojones, the Wimbledon committee, as I've expected.

To prefer to a 6-time champion on your courts a challenger with no titles on grass is disgraceful.

how can it be "disgraceful," when there's such a gap at the top this season?

World Tour Rankings as of June 13th ...................

 

[gpt]

The Wimbledon seedings are based on grass points for the last two years.

(Which is why I'm wondering why Roger is seeded third and not second, since he won in 2009, but that's beside the current point.)

If you look closely, you'll see that the seedings don't in fact mirror the ATP rankings.

thanks, my mistake
i have looked at the atp rankings since my post

 

[Katetennis]

Seeding the Williams sisters so low when they have won 9 of the last 11 Wimbledons is an insult.

An insult is right! She made a return to competition yesterday, and she proved She's still the queen. would she qualify for the olympics though?
I'd love to see her playing doubles with her sister like 4 years ago. http://www.olympic.org/tennis-doubles-women

 

[roundiesee]

Actually Roger's seeding is quite interesting. I remember way back 2002 (can't recall what his seeding was) he was considered by many (Mac notwithstanding) to be almost a shoe-in for the title; of course, Ancic's rout of Federer in the first round was completely unexpected. In 2003 when seeded 4th he was again an overwhelming favourite in the eyes of many tennis observers, and he duly obliged by winning that year. This year I was a little disappointed with him being seeded 3rd, but I guess the Wimbledon committee's decision is often against public sentiment. Let's hope he will perform better than his seeding suggests.

 

[Tammo]

He needed to have won Queen's I think.

yeah, you're probably right.

 

[Tennis360]

Richie is screwed by the fact that he didn't play last year. No way he should be seeded lower than Almagro, whose best result is 3rd round.

He didn't play 2 years in a row. he's actually way better grasscourt player than some of the players seeded above him.

 

[slice bh compliment]

He didn't play 2 years in a row. he's actually way better grasscourt player than some of the players seeded above him.

Yes, he will be the first French guy to overachieve since Yannick Noah.

 

[Love Game]

An insult is right! She made a return to competition yesterday, and she proved She's still the queen. would she qualify for the olympics though?
I'd love to see her playing doubles with her sister like 4 years ago. http://www.olympic.org/tennis-doubles-women

I don't get that. what's an "insult" about treating all players equally?

Wimbledon starts in ?what? five days? The WS haven't played for ... how long? ... before they actually showed up in Eastbourne this week, nobody knew for sure whether they'd even be playing.

I understand that the WS have good excuses for remaining inactive for so long, but to me they come across as elitist, unwilling to play the "lesser" tournaments, but even if that's an unfair criticism, it's fair to say they haven't shown their level of play in time to be seeded preferentially higher than their WTA rankings, dont you agree?

 

[clayman2000]

Seedings about right. Based on how Murray looked in Queens, im not sure you would rather player him than Djoker.

 

[genius24]

seems a little weird to see federer as the #3 seed.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

Seeding the Williams sisters so low when they have won 9 of the last 11 Wimbledons is an insult.

I think it's incredibly generous that Serena got an 8 seed when she hadn't played in about 12 months....

 

[Tennis360]

Yes, he will be the first French guy to overachieve since Yannick Noah.

What's wrong with my statement? I'm just stating the fact.... if you think Almagro is better than Gasquet on GRASS you better think again.

 

[batz]

Why on Earth would James Ward, who's never been in the Top 100 suddenly jump over 100 'ranking' spots to inside the Top 32.
He ALWAYS peaks at Queens/Eastbourne every year, this year more than others. I truly hope this spurs him on to become Top 100, but he's 24, and if his results follow suit as they usually do, then we won't see him again until this time next year. Hopefully he starts playing Qualies for bigger tournaments and winning through, he needs main tour matches regularly.

Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!

That's the sound of Jaggy's joke going over your head mate

 

[HurricaneDominic]

Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!

That's the sound of Jaggy's joke going over your head mate

Sorry, didn't realize. I can't tell the tone of peoples comments by reading them online. Would be different if you heard people say it I guess . .

 

[batz]

Sorry, didn't realize. I can't tell the tone of peoples comments by reading them online. Would be different if you heard people say it I guess . .

No need for apologies mate - it's only the internetz.

'Big Upping' Ward has become the 'in joke' on here for the last couple of weeks since his Queen's run. Mostly in repsonse to the daftys who post after every non top 5 player has a half decent result. See the myriad of Raonic/Dolgolpolev threads from January/February for what I'm talking about.

 

[robin7]

That shows the rankings, not the seedings.

In 2003, he may have been ranked 5th, but he was actually seeded 4th. Carlos Moya above him didn't play.
And last year, he was top seed as he had a lot more grass points than Rafa did.

Oops. You are right.

 

[Fedace]

Does this mean Murray will have to play Djokovic in the semis ?? and he can avoid the top 2 boys, nadal and Federer til then finals ?